Re: HLA Stdlib v2.2 is now available.

//\\o//\\annabee wrote:
På Thu, 20 Sep 2007 23:58:20 +0100, skrev JDavison <jd@xxxxxxxxxx>:

Assembly has always been "the best and simplest way".

Yes. But was it allways seen this way? Not by me.
It appear it is not really viewed this way now either.

I think we're talking about a "property" of assembly language programming.
It will be "the best and simplest way" whether it appears that way to everybody,
or whether it appears that way to nobody. It doesn't matter.
It's still going to be "the best and simplest way" whether anybody sees it or not.

This is a problem, for real debate, since when so few people are doing asm, it will appear that HLLers have an easier time. Thus making a lie appear true.


I don't really see it as a problem. At least not for me, or for us asmers.
The majority of programmers program in languages that are top-selling software
packages, e.g. Visual C++, Visual C#, Delphi, etc.
But that doesn't alter the fundamental property of Assembly Language in any way.
It's still the best, and still the simplest way of writing applications.

As long as you're not using a "tool" that doesn't allow for linking
up with libraries, the way Rosasm is set up.

We do not need this with RosAsm. For "modular" there is the RosAsm INCINCLUDER
and for cutting dead code, there is the "Orphan List".

But, to me, that takes away from the simplicity of assembly.
That's like going around your elbow to scratch the back of your hand.
Assembly would still be the "best way", but no longer the "simplest way".


< http://www.szmyggenpv.com/downloads/FindDuplicates.Zip > (updated)

(I had no idea I had this amount of duplicate files on my hardrive).

There's simply no reason for anyone to ever use Rosasm.

Seems it is good for not turning a person sour. :D

You're right, and I apologize for the name-calling. You seem toned-down a lot more
here lately, and I was way out of line.

It's too bad we can't say that about "you know who".


.