Re: debug


Betov wrote:


Instead of repeating Randall Hyde insane lies, why don't
you show us a program that would hang with the addition of
a NOP (or anything else)?

If you can write such a program yourself, it only demonstrates your
lack of knowledge when it comes to assembly langauge programming.
Perhaps you should learn more than just the "basics of assembly" before
you make such posts.


As a matter of fact, any RosAsm user can witness that the
tool is extreemely secure,

At least, if they don't dig very deeply. The truth is that you swindled
everyone about your disassembler for three years before I discovered
that your disassembler doesn't produce a source file that corresponds
to the actual objects -- a non-starter for anything calling itself a
disassembler.


and very exceptionaly have to
report hanging bugs. Most use it daily, since years without
having ever hang.

Provide proof that "most" RosAsm users use your disassembler daily.


Strangely, the only one seeing it as buggy are the ones
who do not use it.

Well, *I've* used it. And I found some *incredible* defects in the
system.


By the way, the un-honnest manipulation done by Randall
Hyde on one of his snippet, was evidently fixed, so that
the Disassembler-Reassembler could do its job.

Why yes, disassembling a program that was little more than a string of
print statements was evidently fixed. I wonder why none of the other
disassemblers had a problem disassembling that code?

Obviously, anytime I find a defect in your code, my examples are
"evidently fixed". Too bad your disassembler (and assembler, for that
matter) never was fixed.



It has been
fixed since then,

No, it was not.
Sure, you handled the trivial case of recognizing HLA string data
(whose simple nature suggests that your disassembler is a *long* ways
away from being stable), but what you've not fixed is the fact that
your disassembler cannot handle multiple sections, that it rearranges
code and data, and AFAIK, it still injects extra code and data into the
source file it produces. These are all fatal design flaws for something
calling it a disassembler.


and has absolutely no relationship -as
anyone can expect-, with the fact of adding a NOP.

I was the one who injected the NOP to demonstrate that you could handle
code that was modified after disassembly. However, that doesn't change
the fact that the RosAsm disassembler *does* inject extra data and code
into the source file it produces and that it rearranges the code and
data. It also merges different sections in the COFF file together
(because RosAsm can't handle multiple code and data sections). And it
does other things that something calling itself a disassembler just
shouldn't do.


It was
because of a bad interpretation of his Pascal-Like Strings,
that the Disassembler did not assume, at that time.

Yes, we understand that your disassembler can't handle anything except
the few data types that *you* use consistently. But someone thinking
about using RosAsm should keep this in mind -- if the RosAsm
disassembler fails on a data structure I've created, how is it going to
behave with data structures they've created? The bottom line is that
the RosAsm disassembler works fine on the simplistic code that *you*
write, Rene, but it fails on most everything else.




Moreover,
anything related to RosAsm isn't widely acknowledged or accepted as a
viable tool due to its buggy nature, non-standard syntax and the string
of political/ideological insanities attached to it due to the fanatical
nature of Betov, the main author.

Correct: I am a "fanatic" of the GPL, who worked for free
for about 10 years,

He isn't talking about the GPL.

at collectively producing an Environment
that could hardly be beaten by the Anti-GPL Movement.

The RosAsm Public License that you've attached to RosAsm is definitely
anti-GPL.

So,
given the evidences showing that 99% of the Win32 Assembly
area is overflown with such right-wing dements, there is
nothing surprising with having RosAsm rejected from most
places.

Yes, anybody who disagrees with you is a "right-wing dement" and is
wrong. BTW, I'd peg the number at 99.99%.


As for your support to an individual as scandalous as
Randall Hyde, this says all there is to say about yourself.

As usual, you blame me for the fact that everyone disagrees with you.
A bit paranoid, Rene? You should seek some professional help. You need
it.
Cheers,
Randy Hyde

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The fun goes on
    ... Why are you so obsessed with hating Randall Hyde? ... resulting in people like me refusing to read your RosAsm documentation. ... > for, say around 3 years of deliriums about "The Perfect Disassembler", ... > explained how to write an Assembler, by the guy who never wrote ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • De- Evolution
    ... > RosAsm Disassembler-Reassembler is actually (developement ... disassembler *doesn't* disassemble anything properly. ... RosASM as long as you take the attitude "I'll get around ... recursive macro invocations. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: .EXE -> .ASM -> .EXE
    ... You are mistaken in asuming that all RosAsm users are only the ones ... But you guys have claimed how great your disassembler ... The goal is translation of libraries to pure assembly code, ... insetad simply you do as in other assemblers that is.. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Renes Revisionist History, Again
    ... When I said the apps "sucked hard", ... I was astonished that even Rene would use a few simple "hello world" ... examples as proof that RosAsm is "the fastest, ... >> have you seen how poorly it works compared to a real disassembler? ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: A modern view of the halting problem
    ... RosAsm can disassemble properly. ... the other ones, where the Disassembler fails. ... RosAsm could chocking when adding a NOP to a disasembly. ... you use separate code to process the RosAsm equates file. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)