Re: a 'turbo' assembly language

From: Betov (betov_at_free.fr)
Date: 12/24/04 

Date: 24 Dec 2004 10:13:52 GMT

RR <RR@RR.RR> écrivait news:nhons0lg8anb5r9bj9f6qcurnul1j24ejn@4ax.com:

> I say that if
> you try this language you could write what you belive
> impossible in the 1/50 of the time, with more +1000% of readability.
>
> This means that if you are an old assembly programmer and do 1kb
> of code for one day, with this you could do 50kb code / day
>
> With this You will go more fast of a C (or whatever language you want)
> programmer because debugging assembly program is easier.
>
> In few words: the nasm assembly language would be a subset of the
> language so you can write old assembly nasm language too but
> "/" is= to ";", ";" is= "\n", "|" is= "\n"
> If some error is found you can read the .asm translation: find errors
> in an assembly program should be trivial.
> [...]

Impressive, but there are several wrong assumptions, here.

* "Writing Asm would be more time consuming than HLL". I do
not know of any reason why this could be true, but i know
of several, why it can be wrong. For example, the Debugging
time. If Assembly is considered more difficult and more time
consuming than HLL, this is for the single and simple reason
that nobody ever wrote the required Tools Environnement for
making Asm easy. The reason for this is that there is no
money to make with such an Asm Environnement, and this is why
only volunteers like me and some others are doing it (slowly),
for free...

* "Asm would not be Readable whereas C would be". As much proven
by so many discussion, here, readability is, partially, a matter
of individual tastes, choices and habits. Nevertheless, if we
only consider the objective facts only, Assembly is, evidently,
_way_ _more_ _readable_ than C is, at least, to me.

* "Dev-Times are bound to the Language". Might be partially true
but, even if partially true, as long as the language is "usable",
this is not significant inside a whle Dev-Time, that is mainly
spent at thinking, finding Doc and Debugging. Where the Tool
might help, for this, is not directly with the _Language_, but
with the Language Environnement. For example, when you have a
Tool like RosAsm, coming with an integrated Source Level Debugger,
with all of the facilities for Stepping, mem scanning, and so on,
your Debugging time is pushed close to zero. No relationship with
RosAsm Assembler Syntax, at all.

* "A superset for NASM would be interresting". This has already
be done several times. Up to now, the only result of these attempts
has been that the Authors of the supersets have created their own
private language, that nobody but them uses. Babelism. At best
(should i say "at worst"... ;) such attempts as Randall Hyde HLA
Pre-Parser can have some poor success in deturning some beginners
from Assembly. So, to become something really interresting, such
a superset would require that a significative number of Programmers
would choose to use it. Unfortunately, this will not happend. Randall
Hyde succeeded with this because he is a super expert in Propaganda,
lies and swindling, but if your intentions are honest, you will much
probably go nowhere with this.

So said, i wish you that i would be proven wrong with the above
paragraph, and that a significative number of Programmers would
like to take your road. ;)

Betov.

< http://rosasm.org/ >

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Hey, what is all this off topic posting?
    ... >>> that's all you're using macros for, I can see why you don't much like ASM. ... > PL/I language constructs though. ... >> write the macros using some arcane assembler to do that on a new ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: a turbo assembly language
    ... >>With this You will go more fast of a C (or whatever language you want) ... >>programmer because debugging assembly program is easier. ... > RosAsm Assembler Syntax, at all. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: To Beth
    ... Allready, I write asm, in many many cases, when using the ... I disagree that development time is faster writing in assembler, ... vanishes if you have a good macro language available. ... Not commenting code in my opinion is the worst habit ever. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: newbie: good Assembler book
    ... DLLs with RosAsm for use by ... The language you're calling your assembly code doesn't support DLLs. ... It has todo with the fact that asm is much ... I can NOT say this is the same for whatever assembler you ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: a turbo assembly language
    ... C is much faster to develop in than Assembler. ... bottleneck when programming in assembly language. ... Many ASM programmers, rightly or wrongly, believe that ASM should only ... even show a single request for an ASM programmer. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)