Re: MASM as an addition to the VC Express edition now available

Herbert Kleebauer <klee@xxxxxxxxx> écrivait
news:448D1CB1.44AF0ED@xxxxxxxxx:

Why do you write your assembler yourself? Why not just call MASM.DLL?
Why do you write your editor and debugger yourself, why not just call
functions in an existing edit.dll or debug.dll.

Why don't you do direct output to the screen memory, instead
of calling for an INT? And so on... At the end, why calling
for an OS, at all, as long as you can write your own? Absurd.

Now, why i do NOT:

* Use MASM? Because it is simply not usable.

* Call for an Edit DLL? Because there does not exist such a
set of functionalities that could save me from writting my
own, and because using an Edit-Control, would be more work
to customize to my needs, than to write it all from scrach.

* Call for the Debug Function? The fact is that we _do_. Why
do we? Because it is simpler than to rewrite our own from
scratch, in that case.

My only fixed opinion, in such matters, is just to take the
simpler way. Does the provided Function do what i need? If yes,
OK, i take it. I am not used to write for nope, and i have
other things to do than to rewrite things that exist and that
do all i need.


To execute a complete
editor in edit.dll is much more powerful than just calling functions in
kernel32.dll or user32.dll.

Customizing an existing functionality that does not do what
we need, is way more work than rewriting it all from scratch,
in such a case, a fully demonstrated by several other attempts.


And if you are not happy with the MASM
syntax, modify the HLA source (it is PD) to make your own "preparser"
to convert your preferred syntax to MASM syntax and call MASM as a
backend.

:]]]]]

You are so funny...

:]]]]]

For writing applications it is surely the right way to use what's
available and not to reinvent the wheel again and again (and you
also have to use the DLL interface if the program should work on
more than just one version of Windows). But this isn't true if
the goal isn't a program but to understand the working principles
(learn assembly programming). If a student has to write code to
output the content of a register to the screen, then it is no
good idea to say: I don't need to write this, there is already
such a function in an existing DLL, all I have to do is, to call
this function. On the other side, it's also no good idea if somebody
who wants to write a program, implements all the functions which
are already available in a DLL a second time himself.

Nothing but what i wrote above.


You have to learn how to add and multiply numbers. But once you have
learned it, then there is nothing wrong using a pocket calculator.

And then?


Betov.

< http://rosasm.org >




.

Relevant Pages

  • Code Centralization
    ... Code must reside in the vb editor. ... DLL's are data link ... >Perhaps a VB6 DLL or VB.NET addin. ...
    (microsoft.public.excel.programming)
  • Re: Having trouble understanding assemblies
    ... > I have an editor exe and a dll written in C#. ... > closely related to the dll and needs full access to it. ... > app can have access to some things, but my editor app is in a ... > 'client' to my dllin the same way other apps would be. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework)
  • Re: Having trouble understanding assemblies
    ... > I have an editor exe and a dll written in C#. ... The editor exe is closely ... related to the dll and needs full access to it. ... editor app is in a different assembly so that doesn't work. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework)
  • Re: Function pointers for DLL functions?
    ... For what you want to do, it just screams "ActiveX" ... How would I dynamically pass parameters selected at run-time to a DLL ... What is the syntax for this? ... pass this number to the DLL using function pointers? ...
    (microsoft.public.vc.mfc)
  • Re: Exporting symbols from EXE to DLL?
    ... And the syntax looks like you cannot specify the module extension. ... Then I wonder what extension the program loader would expect. ... In fact it would be much easier to use the API functions with load time linkage compared to passings a bunch of function pointers to the DLL module. ...
    (comp.os.os2.programmer.misc)