Re: Arrrrrrrrrrrrggggg!!

From: Sevag Krikorian (kahlinor_at_nop.yahoo.com)
Date: 03/01/05 

Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:49:17 -0500

'\\o//'annabee wrote:
> På Tue, 01 Mar 2005 02:20:56 -0500, skrev Sevag Krikorian
> <kahlinor@nop.yahoo.com>:
>
>> In both cases, it's time lost. We can never recover that!
>
>
> In some cases you can. In my experience, waiting for the right moment to
> do something you can defeat time. For one thing because of leaps in
> hardware development, is way faster then software.
> Defeating time is exactly what I felt I did when i found RosAsm. I found
> the tool I would have tried to create if it would not be there. So I
> sort of recovered the years, by finding the tool.
>

Yes, I thought it was a sound idea as well. The first time I ran into
it was with Emu8086. It made a nice toy, but limited you to the choice
of what the author offered you in terms of editor, disassembler,etc.

> Similarly, you can recover that time you lost, by starting programming
> in RosAsm, and find out from you own experience that it actually is very
> nice for large project management. Very fast development, no setbacks.
> You do not have to include you source in the release exe like I did, and
> you do not have to use the GPL on your own sources.
>

That's all very nice. I did ding out a couple demos with RosAsm about
a year ago. The system just didn't 'stick' with me because it didn't
offer what I want.
Of cource, Rene played a major part in being a deterrent. I cannot
respect someone who shows no respect for other people's works and views
unless they make his 'list.'

> You are a clever programmer Krikorian. Why use the slower tools ?
>
> I will never understand it.
>

Thanks, but didn't we go over this before? My biggest project, HIDE
fully rebuilds in under 6 seconds. And I only do a full rebuild at the
end of the day as a 'sanity' check to see if everything is working
properly. Most of the time it's <1s. Besides, compile speed is not
what saves the time, it's the tool and what it offers.
Of course, I'll be keeping an eye out for FASM64, which will in most
likelyhood, arrive before HLA64. Then I'll use FASM to do 64 bit
coding... unless I can convince Randall to update the fhla 1.xx to
support 64bit FASM.
I have an Athlon64 just itching to be explored.

> If your interessts is in development tools, why not take RosAsm and port
> it to Linux ?
>
> This will bring me to linux, if ReactOs do not make it.
>

Isn't that what LuxAsm is for? I'm keeping an eye on that project, even
though it appears to be vapourware at this point. They should forget
about arguing over all the features and just build the basic low-level
assembler that can compile itself. From there, it's just a matter of
deciding what to 'add' to the project next.

The low-level assembler need not have any 'features.' Just the bare-
bones NASM syntax ( I think that's what they are gonig with anyway). 

-- 
[kain]
http://www.geocities.com/kahlinor