Re: Definitions - What are yours?
- From: Betov <betov@xxxxxxx>
- Date: 31 Jul 2007 16:50:08 GMT
"rhyde@xxxxxxxxxx" <rhyde@xxxxxxxxxx> écrivait
news:1185898400.738351.53010@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
Where does MASM beat FASM, for example? Nowhere.
The macro facilities are better.
The compile-time language is better.
Then show us, clown.
I challenge you, about Macros, to output a Bitmap created
by MASM Macros (Yes, clown, FASM *CAN* do that).
I already challenge you to reproduce the RosAsm HLLisms
Macros with MASM (and the RosAsm Macros System is way
simpler than the FASM Macros System...). Still waiting.
Since...
MASM supports high-level assembly features.
The reason why it is not Assembler.
MASM supports data types far better than FASM.
Same.
The syntax is closer to Intel Syntax (for those who care).
The MASM Syntax is simply faultive. Period.
There are far more real-world examples written MASM.
Right. And then?
There are far more books, tutorials, and so on written for MASM.
Right. And then?
FASM does have some benefits over MASM, but trying to claim that MASM
never beats FASM is absolutely foolish.
The fool is you, clown. Prove otherwise if you can.
Betov.
< http://rosasm.org >
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Definitions - What are yours?
- From: rhyde@xxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Definitions - What are yours?
- References:
- Definitions - What are yours?
- From: CodeMonk
- Re: Definitions - What are yours?
- From: santosh
- Re: Definitions - What are yours?
- From: rhyde@xxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Definitions - What are yours?
- From: Betov
- Re: Definitions - What are yours?
- From: rhyde@xxxxxxxxxx
- Definitions - What are yours?
- Prev by Date: Re: Definitions - What are yours?
- Next by Date: Re: Definitions - What are yours?
- Previous by thread: Re: Definitions - What are yours?
- Next by thread: Re: Definitions - What are yours?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|