Re: TASM revisited
- From: johnzulu[at]yahoo.com
- Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 16:16:30 +0800
KJH,
Do not distribute the source code or software when it is under a
license! The lawyer firms will breath down your neck if they found out
that you are "stealing" from their clients. Sorry to be harsh but
that is the fact of life. I too DON'T dare go against them.
Regards,
John
On 24 Oct 2006 17:02:43 -0700, k_jh77@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Hello all!.
Just one quick survey. Suppose that I have a modified source code for
Borland's Turbo Assembler 32bit version. Do you think that it would be
beneficial to port it to for example to Linux or FreeBSD?
Because that would be relatively simple. Just replace those ca. 20
operating system interface primitives in the assembler, and
reassembling the whole package, maybe using FASM or NASM, or what have
you. Textual conversion of sources would take some time (currently MASM
syntax), but it's nothing special. Of course it still would produce an
OMF modules for 80x86 architectures. But at least it would run on Linux
and variants.
If we don't consider TASM's current copyright situation (which belongs
to Paradigm), what do you think in general? I think it's abandonware,
YMMV. I have spent my last two years disassembling and reverse
engineering this wonderful assembler, and now it is in a point where I
have a pretty much full specs for it's inner workings, commented all
it's ca. 2000 functions, it's data structures, the whole 75000 lines of
assembly, and the byproduct is what some might call a source code.
I'm just interested in general, what do you think about TASM? Would you
use it if it was updated with latest instructions and if it works under
Linux or something?
br,
KJH
- References:
- TASM revisited
- From: k_jh77
- TASM revisited
- Prev by Date: Re: A modern view of the halting problem
- Next by Date: Re: Time this code, please!
- Previous by thread: Re: TASM revisited
- Next by thread: Re: TASM revisited
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|