Author Topic: Macro Assembler Syntax vs NASM - YASM - FASM  (Read 3366 times)

HSE

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2070
  • AMD 7-32 / i3 10-64
Re: Macro Assembler Syntax vs NASM - YASM - FASM
« Reply #15 on: September 06, 2021, 06:02:08 AM »
 :biggrin: :biggrin:

> And they can build computers with needles and coconuts.

You will have to share this technique with me.

Only Real Men trademark can do that!!

I can't write in Hex notation   :eusa_snooty:
Equations in Assembly: SmplMath

HSE

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2070
  • AMD 7-32 / i3 10-64
Re: Macro Assembler Syntax vs NASM - YASM - FASM
« Reply #16 on: September 06, 2021, 06:26:37 AM »
Imagine having to push and pop coconuts with crude
tools while possibly being poked with needles that overflowed the abacus stacks.

 :biggrin: :eusa_clap:

Did history ever record the Abacus Machine Language Manual ?

Abacus is still in use recently. For sure there is a manual. If not, should be not a big problem to write one.

But is know that Greeks (~400 BC) maked calculations using some kind of wood boxes in wich they placed little stones. And nobody know how that worked. They write results in what we know now as "roman" numbers, and is pretty hard to make calculations using them.
Equations in Assembly: SmplMath

hutch--

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 9319
  • Mnemonic Driven API Grinder
    • The MASM32 SDK
Re: Macro Assembler Syntax vs NASM - YASM - FASM
« Reply #17 on: September 06, 2021, 02:19:13 PM »
 :biggrin:

Ah, now I get it, a mystical device whose origin is lost in the mists of time that was so powerful that mere mortals prostrated themselves in the presence of those who could operate these magical devices. While modern technology has downgraded the heights of such ancient technology to electric idiots that can only count in 1s and 0s, a true master of such an ancient device could eat them alive with their analogue interface and magical methods of calculation that were completed while ordinary mortals were trying to work out how to enter that data with a keyboard.

Now the artisans of such magical devices were not willing to share their trade secrets so later researchers had to try and learn these secrets by trial and error and they have only had minor success in such an undertaking. So far they have learnt that the beads have to have the right mass and while this may have religious connotations, it also meant that the weight had to be right, too light and they bounced which produced rounding errors, too heavy and you trimmed off the last few digits.

Construction techniques were subject to rare and difficult to find materials, the tracks that the beads ran on had to have the lowest coefficience of friction possible so the very best was skinned with woven pubic hair of virgins that lived in red light areas. To get the right resonance, the frame to hang it all off was constructed from the wishbone of an ass then coloured with rare and exotic substances that were transported by camel train from equally rare and exotic locations in the world than no sane person would ever enter.

With such difficulties, now you know why the electric idiots have gained in popularity as a high end ancient device was generally beyond the means of the great unwashed.  :tongue:
hutch at movsd dot com
http://www.masm32.com    :biggrin:  :skrewy:

TouEnMasm

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1804
    • EditMasm
Re: Macro Assembler Syntax vs NASM - YASM - FASM
« Reply #18 on: September 06, 2021, 06:28:38 PM »

The masm macros are the way to avoid hieroglyphic coding.
Perhaps nasm have some popularity I don't understand for what.
Some say than nasm have few bugs than masm but it stay to made proof of that.
Fa is a musical note to play with CL

TimoVJL

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 999
Re: Macro Assembler Syntax vs NASM - YASM - FASM
« Reply #19 on: September 06, 2021, 07:32:20 PM »

The masm macros are the way to avoid hieroglyphic coding.
Perhaps nasm have some popularity I don't understand for what.
Some say than nasm have few bugs than masm but it stay to made proof of that.
masm exists only in DOS / Windows
May the source be with you

TouEnMasm

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1804
    • EditMasm
Re: Macro Assembler Syntax vs NASM - YASM - FASM
« Reply #20 on: September 06, 2021, 07:41:08 PM »
Quote
masm exists only in DOS / Windows
Only ????????????????
The only is just 96% of the computers in the world.Ok linux exist but i am not sure he couldn't use masm.
https://halcyoona.wordpress.com/2018/09/15/run-masm-on-linux/
and now what stay ?
Fa is a musical note to play with CL

jj2007

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12449
  • Assembler is fun ;-)
    • MasmBasic
Re: Macro Assembler Syntax vs NASM - YASM - FASM
« Reply #21 on: September 06, 2021, 08:22:59 PM »
pubic hair of virgins that lived in red light areas

That might be difficult to find, I agree :tongue:

HSE

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2070
  • AMD 7-32 / i3 10-64
Re: Macro Assembler Syntax vs NASM - YASM - FASM
« Reply #22 on: September 06, 2021, 10:42:54 PM »

Ah, now I get it, a mystical device whose origin is lost in the mists of time that was so powerful that mere mortals prostrated themselves in the presence of those who could operate these magical devices. While modern technology has downgraded the heights of such ancient technology to electric idiots that can only count in 1s and 0s, a true master of such an ancient device could eat them alive with their analogue interface and magical methods of calculation that were completed while ordinary mortals were trying to work out how to enter that data with a keyboard.

That it's true. I can't imagine how to enter data with a keyboard in a simple piece of wood.  :biggrin:  It's just like a board game, you move the stones with the hand.

Very interesting, searching a litttle, happen that greek board evolved in roman board (or roman abacus). Roman name for litlle stone is "calculi", then calculation is to move the stones!!

Of course, until Newton and Leibniz, calculation was sum, rest, multiplication and division.  :biggrin:

Apparently all this kind of devices evolve from Sumerian abacus that appeared between 2700–2300 BC. For sure at that time the wood with some lines drawed on it was a mystical device.

Equations in Assembly: SmplMath

daydreamer

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1983
  • "follow the blue star!!!"
Re: Macro Assembler Syntax vs NASM - YASM - FASM
« Reply #23 on: September 06, 2021, 11:38:40 PM »
first ever chess computer was a fraud,inside the box they hid a dwarf that took care of "computer" chess moves :greenclp:
some ancient civilisation had 60 as base,seem even more advanced than hexadecimal
but we inherit 60s=minute,60minutes=hour from them
SIMD fan and macro fan
I am an Invoker
"An Invoker is a mage who specializes in the manipulation of raw and elemental energies."
Teacher "REAL8 + QWORD is like apples and oranges,you cant mix them"
Student "ofcourse you can,it becomes a fruit salad" :)

hutch--

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 9319
  • Mnemonic Driven API Grinder
    • The MASM32 SDK
Re: Macro Assembler Syntax vs NASM - YASM - FASM
« Reply #24 on: October 04, 2021, 09:09:45 AM »
In the days of yaw, 60 was a good number, it could be divided by 12, 6, 5, 4, 3 and 2. We have base 10 for an obvious reason, if you can count fingers and two thumbs you have hit the big time for analogue calculations. Its only electric idiots that use powers of 2.
hutch at movsd dot com
http://www.masm32.com    :biggrin:  :skrewy:

mineiro

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 855
Re: Macro Assembler Syntax vs NASM - YASM - FASM
« Reply #25 on: October 04, 2021, 09:47:54 AM »
I believe it was the Incas, Aztecs or Mayans who used base 20; fingers and toes.

We use base 10 for several reasons; initially for having 10 fingers on the hands. But he stuck with Pythagoras. He created the word math and philosopher. For him 10 was a beautiful, harmonic number. It was the sum of 1+2+3+4; or just earth, fire, water and air.
Pythagoreans discovered that certain quantities could not be represented by a whole integers numbers or a fraction of whole integers numbers.
I'd rather be this ambulant metamorphosis than to have that old opinion about everything

daydreamer

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1983
  • "follow the blue star!!!"
Re: Macro Assembler Syntax vs NASM - YASM - FASM
« Reply #26 on: October 07, 2021, 08:02:57 PM »
I believe it was the Incas, Aztecs or Mayans who used base 20; fingers and toes.

We use base 10 for several reasons; initially for having 10 fingers on the hands. But he stuck with Pythagoras. He created the word math and philosopher. For him 10 was a beautiful, harmonic number. It was the sum of 1+2+3+4; or just earth, fire, water and air.
Pythagoreans discovered that certain quantities could not be represented by a whole integers numbers or a fraction of whole integers numbers.
hot climate without shoes=you could also count with the toes,but European climate shoes capped it to be only 10 fingers :bgrin:
wonder if tristate base 3,electronic circuits one and zeros and third state is signal=idle
would solve the 10/3 =3.3333333333... endless 3's and other endless decimals problems?
SIMD fan and macro fan
I am an Invoker
"An Invoker is a mage who specializes in the manipulation of raw and elemental energies."
Teacher "REAL8 + QWORD is like apples and oranges,you cant mix them"
Student "ofcourse you can,it becomes a fruit salad" :)

mineiro

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 855
Re: Macro Assembler Syntax vs NASM - YASM - FASM
« Reply #27 on: October 09, 2021, 04:05:56 AM »
would solve the 10/3 =3.3333333333... endless 3's and other endless decimals problems?
This type of problem happens with any numeric base.
I think was russians that developed a ternary machine.
I'd rather be this ambulant metamorphosis than to have that old opinion about everything

hutch--

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 9319
  • Mnemonic Driven API Grinder
    • The MASM32 SDK
Re: Macro Assembler Syntax vs NASM - YASM - FASM
« Reply #28 on: October 10, 2021, 06:30:25 AM »
 :biggrin:


Base 3. = 1,2,3

conversion,
                 1 = .3 repeater
                 2 = .6 repeater
                 3 = 1.0


    or

One Third.
hutch at movsd dot com
http://www.masm32.com    :biggrin:  :skrewy:

nidud

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2390
    • https://github.com/nidud/asmc
Re: Macro Assembler Syntax vs NASM - YASM - FASM
« Reply #29 on: October 10, 2021, 11:39:06 PM »
deleted
« Last Edit: February 26, 2022, 05:08:30 AM by nidud »