Re: .EXE -> .ASM -> .EXE


Guga wrote:
" Where are all the users of your disassembler?
Where's all this C library code that is being disassembled with your
disassembler?"

You are mistaken in asuming that all RosAsm users are only the ones
registered in the main RosAsm board.

Where did I make that claim? However, statistically speaking, it's a
good bet that the number of registered users on a board is some
percentage of the total number of users out there. And that percentage
is probably relatively constant across many of the boards.

There are lots of rosasm users in
otehr gorups. Only ona Brasilian Community i have 47 registered people
that i help daily. In another media we have about more then one
thousand assembly users the majoroity of them divided between RosAsm
and Fasm...and..guess what even a beginner says about Hla ? ;) It´s is
not a tease..it is a fact...even beginners that tries HLA says terrible
things about it, and trust me, René is not there to bash your "marter
piece", and neither i need to do that.. They are seeing for themselves.

You expect me to get upset because some beginners says terrible things
about HLA? Hardly. In this big wide world, you can *always* find
someone, or even quite a few people, who will say something bad about
almost anything. As the saying goes, you can't please all the people
all the time. And given your association with the RosAsm project, and
the obivous prejudices of the RosAsm user base against HLA, how many
beginners are going to bother supporting HLA on a RosAsm-based forum?

I applaud your efforts to teach people assembly language, but RosAsm
has a *long* ways to go before it suitable for use by beginners. Your
47 members notwithstanding.




Guess how many users we have in other countries as well..Like in Asia,
or in Europe that are not registered users in the main board ?

Again, your board represents some percentage of the total. So when I
see 123 members on your board and thousands on the MASM, FASM, and HLA
areas, what does that tell me? Do you think that every MASM user is a
member of the MASM32 board, for example?

In the end, arguments about users really is kind of stupid. After all,
we're talking *thousands* of active users here (across all assemblers).
Compared with HLLs, that's absolutely nothing. Hardly indicative of
some "assembly rebirth". Again, I applaud your efforts to teach
beginners, but we've all got a *long* way to go before the numbers are
meaningful. That's why Rene's arguments about "lack of apps" is so
ridiculous. My goodness, he's got a couple dozen of them listed on his
page. That totally insignificant. Even MASM, including all the apps
written since 1998 for Windows, is insignificant compared to HLL
output.




But.,..as usual....if you think that quantity is a synonim of quality
you are utterly mistaken.

But lack of quanity seems to be an indictment that a lot of people
don't think too highly of RosAsm.



About the "all C librarian".. Don´t worry... Don´t blame Rene on
this...It is my fault i have delayed the releasing of the New
LibScanner... I had several personal problems to solve this past months
since i arrived, and got few time to work on that...but, i continued
and soon, we will release a newer version. While René is working in
other aspects on teh project he nicelly took me in charge to continue
the LibScanner main developments

I know nothing about your LibScanner, nor do I really care. It sounds
like a grand kludge intended to make up for the most serious deficiency
plaguing RosAsm--the inability to statically link in code (and produce
code that can be statically linked with other programs). This is
indicative of the problem with RosAsm's design- you guys are busy
writing hacks to work around the design problems rather than doing the
right thing and giving prospective users what they really want -- the
ability to link code. This is the #1 reason why people reject RosAsm.
Why can't you guys just face the fact that Rene's attitude about static
linkage is a non-starter and correct the problem? I realize that
RosAsm's design makes static linking a *very* difficult task, but the
assembler itself isn't *that* big (about 10,000 lines of code the last
time I checked). Even if you have to write it completely over from
scratch it shouldn't take too long as a group effort. Do it right! Give
the people what they want. Once you remove this *very* major
impediment, your user base might start grown substatially in spite of
Rene's rantings around here (after all, this is a *very* insignificant
corner of the internet, his damage is a bit limited even if his
reputation has been getting around).



Currently the LibScanner, parses _all_ .lib/ .ob files contents. It
isolates and saves all objecyt files insiode a lib.. It displays all
info on tjose kind of files (lib or Obj). It displays even CodeView
info (later i´ll finish those damn crappy CodeView stuff...Boy..i hate
M$ for that crappy thing, hehehe)

Again, why bother? Why not just support static linking in RosAsm?




For the New system we are developing... it is full on the development
issue, Thanks for ask. Currently i reviewed some data i want to be
included on the system, and _it does_ a way better job then Ida,
specially because the tool is being designed for other purposes and not
the ones that are focused by Ilfak.

Time will tell. But you guys have claimed how great your disassembler
is going to be "after just one more feature" for so long, without much
in the way of positive results, that it's difficult to believe a word
any RosAsm developer says about the disassembler. And no matter how
many features you add, until you allow the user to interactively
control the disassembly, the product is going to be useful to 99% of
the people who really want to use a disassembler. Oh, it may be better
than dumpbin or objdump, but it still won't be practical. The real
problem, apparently, is that none of you have really bothered to take
the time to disassemble a large project and get the result right (say,
using IDA Pro). If you did, you'd have a much better understanding of
the problems facing someone who is doing some serious disassembly work.
The RosAsm disassembler development team sits around and says "this
would be nice" or "that would be nice" but you don't have the practical
experience to know what really needs to be done. A classic example of
you've solved a problem that no one really needed solved, while
ignoring the real problem people do want solved. It's the "static
linking" issue all over again.


The goal is translation of libraries to pure assembly code, to help
programmers fix, build, translate, learn from their library files.

Better yet, why not simply provide the ability for programmers to
create their own RosAsm librarys, compile them to object code, and link
those in with their RosAsm (or other language) programs? This is the
solution people really want. They don't want to write the code in C,
mess around with a disassembler (that doesn't work), and have to
manually clean up the code afterwards. Heck, they can rewrite the code
in assembly (or use something like the "-S" C compiler option) and get
the job done faster than messing around with a disassembler. Once
again, you guys are solving a problem that doesn't exist.



So, insetad simply you do as in other assemblers that is.. load a .lib
to be used..the user will actually _know_ what thsi library is all
about, what are theyr contents, he will be able to load or isolate one
single functino among the library, clean it and so on.

And how is that better than using a .lib file? Again, I don't know
squat about your LibScanner project, but why not do things the way
people expect them to be done? The same way every other assembler (and
most HLLs) does it? Why do you keep putting off fixing the single
greatest problem with the RosAsm system? This is a waste of your time.
You should be writing library routines for RosAsm users to employ in
their applications rather than screwing around with a LibScanner.


Insetad you keep bashing in otehr people works randall,

Back off, dude. You know *exactly* why I bash RosAsm. I've made the
deal with you in private emails before: get Rene to shut up about me,
HLA, MASM, Hutch, etc., and you'll see me (and most other people around
here) quickly forget you guys even exist. It's a shame that you have to
suffer because of Rene's attitudes, but *you're* the one who decided to
hitch their wagon to that particular horse. Until you learn to control
him, I'll have lots of fun bashing him and his product. Sorry about the
collateral damage, but that's what happens when you follow a leader
like Rene Tournois.


you should
refrain yoruself from once and a while to avoid making ridiculous
claims like this ones.

You need to control your own camp first.
Let me use the quote from the Bible that Rene used around here already:
take care of that log in your own eye before you worry about the mote
in your neighbor's.

You've been around long enough to know that I put up with Rene's crap
for several years before I said "enough is enough" and started
responding in kind. As you've said in the past, "this drives Rene
crazy". Forgive me for intending to do that. Again, your destiny is in
your hands, get him under control.



About your disassembler... i personally don´t care. Specially because
youa re doing it only for your self-promotion campaign and this
stupidity of "I´m better then rené, and i´m better then Every one
else" kind of actitude

I don't have a disassembler. I have a DE that I wrote for my book
project I'm working on. And it seems that every project I work on is a
"self-promotion" campaign with you guys, oh well. I would, however,
like to know why all of my work is a self-promotion campaign the the
stuff you guys are doing is not? Given that Rene is the one constantly
bragging about how *his* disassembler is so much better than all the
others and how *his* assembler is the fastest of all actual assemblers,
and his IDE is the only truly integrated one, you're on really weak
ground talking about self-promotion. I realize that *you* don't do all
this "chest-bombing" that Rene talks about all the time, but Rene is
the public face of your project; and given the animosity he creates
around here, I'm sure you'll agree that it's not a good face.


Well...

Thanks to remind saying about the libscanner anyway.

It will be interesting to see what the product becomes. But I'll still
argue that you're solving the wrong problem.
Cheers,
Randy Hyde

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Why do we use different files for C ?
    ... Perhaps for RosAsm this is a problem. ... For other assemblers, not so much of a problem. ... Yet, for some reason, there are all these assembly language libraries ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: The Randall Hyde lies go on
    ... RosAsm, almost none. ... > RosAsm Disassembler already beats IDA Pro on many points. ... statements between the two assemblers. ... >> The macro system is weak. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Ideal computer language from scratch?
    ... I do not measure the success of RosAsm in term of Users Base, ... Except that all the other assemblers have two to four orders of ... If by "significative" you mean "disassembler ... ReactOS is not yet ready for every days usage. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Stack frames
    ... not a Language that _hydes_. ... So said, "Libraries", in the way you hear it, are ... news Assemblers, like RosAsm are so blazing fast ... RosAsm Clip File Method, is one way (that has poor ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • The Lib debate
    ... Since Master Pdf discovered that RosAsm does not assume Static ... that such an implementation was no use, at all, in their Assemblers. ... let say my opinion about libraries. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)