Re: Skybuck's Wolfram (Turing-Like) Machine implementation

Frank Kotler wrote:
Orlando B. Salazar wrote:

....
And santosh has confessed to being a NASM user,

Confessed? I thought he was braggin'!

You're right; braggin' it is. And, I guess, in a way, so am I.
All I was saying was that he was confessing, openly admitting, making it
public knowledge, coming out of the closet..., etc.
But, we'll stick with "bragging".

which, I see, you are #3 on the Development Team.

Deceptive. I'm a big wheel in the fan club, but "developer" is a stretch.

So, of course, you've got to say what you say.
Nothing's being said that can't be predicted, that's not preprogrammed.

The funny thing is, I figured you'd call me on supporting Santosh just because he's a Nasm user. Which proves your point.

Well, in fact, that's what I *was* doing. Otherwise, I assure you, I
wouldn't have bothered responding any further.

Maybe we could just use equates... or bitflags...

Alrighty. I'll give it a shot.

EQU Development_Team_Member NASM_User_Supporter

Is that what you had in mind?

And here's another one that's just as relevant and controversial:

EQU Ex_Student_Of_Randall_Hyde Lifelong_Supporter_Of_HLA

no matter who it offends, or who it upsets.

What do you use Nasm for, in preference to HLA?

At work. Translating 17+ year-old 16-bit (MASM 5.1) programs into 32-bit
NASM programs.

What do you use HLA for, in preference to Nasm?

HLA is a perfect tool for learning how to program in Assembly Language.
And of course, I understand there are some people here that would rather
not have that information, that truth, be written down, or spoken, or
even privately contemplated in the bathroom.

Doesn't switching to the backward syntax (whichever one's backward) mess you up?

At first it did. But one very quickly gets used to it, when one's
livelihood depends upon it.


Regards,
Orlando B. Salazar

.