Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: nobody AT REPLAY DOT COM (Anonymous), djgpp AT delorie DOT com
From: Nate Eldredge <nate AT cartsys DOT com>
Subject: Re: NASM? Thanks, but no thanks.  (Was Re: Execution finished
  before started!)
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 20:42:45 -0700
Message-ID: <19980523034225.AAK10307@ppp110.cartsys.com>
Precedence: bulk

Initial disclaimer: I don't use NASM significantly. GNU `as' works fine for me.

At 02:53  5/22/1998 +0200, Anonymous wrote:
>I just downloaded NASM (v. .97 ?) and read the docs (HTML-formatted) and I
think
>I'll pass.
>
>(1) It has a "system" for using structures, but the definition and
instantiation
>of structures actually appears to be (intentionally made?) more complex than
>what you'd get by sticking with the "workarounds" in GNU as or by going to the
>effort to hold an unlicensed (unpurchased) copy of TASM or MASM.  I will
concede
>that declaration of a record (or structure) does not amount to forcing the
>allocation of memory space.
>
>(2) It is really its own brand of assembler, using a hybrid of directives
that the
>developers apparently thought were useful but requires a "refcard" 5 pages
long to
>keep track.  This is not a sit-down-and-I-am-coding-in-5-minutes for
experienced
>assembly programmers who might want like to become familiar with all the
directives
>before they start doing any coding.

In my TASM manual, the directive reference is 149 pages long. When I used
it, I had to refer to it nearly every time I wanted to do something, since
they had such horrible names. (Quick! What's the difference between ".err",
".errb", ".errdifi", and ".erre"?) Part of the difficulty with NASM might be
unlearning all the MASM-ism's. (Hmm... say that last word ten times very fast).

If you really liked TASM, you might try JAS, which is reputedly much more
similar. 

ftp://x2ftp.oulu.fi/pub/msdos/programming/djgpp2/jas31.zip

If you *really* liked it, you can buy MASM 6.x (I think), which has COFF
support.

>The DJGPP group appears to take an active interest in promoting
>the use of this assembler, and I really can't see why.

Part of it is certainly due to the fact that it is one of the only free
alternatives to GAS that's suitable for DJGPP. (I haven't heard much about
JAS.) If you can find something better, you are welcome to promote it.

Nate Eldredge
nate AT cartsys DOT com