Re: Skybuck's Wolfram (Turing-Like) Machine implementation
- From: Betov <betov@xxxxxxx>
- Date: 27 Oct 2007 10:01:09 GMT
Frank Kotler <fbkotler@xxxxxxxxxxx> écrivait
fRCUi.63$MW.59@trndny05:">news:fRCUi.63$MW.59@trndny05:
PS. By the way, I also use NASM. But I used HLA to learn assembly.
Well, that's evidence that using HLA doesn't "lock you in" to using
HLA and never being able to use another assembler.
No. This is evidence (one more time), that after an HLA failure,
the idiot, able to fall into the trap, will never admit that they
have been trapped.
What do you use Nasm for,
in preference to HLA?
He never used HLA for anything, and he will much probably never
do anything better with NASM, because an idiot is an idiot. Whatever
hammer he could try to hit a nail with, it will always end on his
fingers.
What do you use HLA for, in preference to Nasm?
Doesn't switching to the backward syntax (whichever one's backward)
mess you up?
:]]
RMD therapy?
Betov.
< http://rosasm.org >
.
- References:
- Re: Skybuck's Wolfram (Turing-Like) Machine implementation
- From: Orlando B. Salazar
- Re: Skybuck's Wolfram (Turing-Like) Machine implementation
- From: santosh
- Re: Skybuck's Wolfram (Turing-Like) Machine implementation
- From: Orlando B. Salazar
- Re: Skybuck's Wolfram (Turing-Like) Machine implementation
- From: santosh
- Re: Skybuck's Wolfram (Turing-Like) Machine implementation
- From: Orlando B. Salazar
- Re: Skybuck's Wolfram (Turing-Like) Machine implementation
- From: Frank Kotler
- Re: Skybuck's Wolfram (Turing-Like) Machine implementation
- From: Orlando B. Salazar
- Re: Skybuck's Wolfram (Turing-Like) Machine implementation
- From: Frank Kotler
- Re: Skybuck's Wolfram (Turing-Like) Machine implementation
- Prev by Date: Re: Slow nasm
- Next by Date: Re: Skybuck's Wolfram (Turing-Like) Machine implementation
- Previous by thread: Re: Skybuck's Wolfram (Turing-Like) Machine implementation
- Next by thread: Re: Skybuck's Wolfram (Turing-Like) Machine implementation
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|