[Implemented] assembler forum

[netmaestro]

I'd like to learn inlined asm coding with PB and I'm sure there are other folks here who would like to do the same thing. There are good reference materials available free but what we miss is a place where the skilled asm programmers here could post tips & tricks, tutorials and simple demo programs and we could ask questions. If there are others interested in participating, I think it could become a valuable resource. Anyone else think it's a good idea?

[luis]

Even if not really so much PB-dependant (and there are many asm-only forums) it would be nice.

Sadly I could not participate because I don't have enough time to learn that too, but I would certainly peek at it from time to time ! My last machine code programming was on 6502 and 8088 with the segmented memory model

I think it's a great idea

[Seymour Clufley]

I have never used assembly so, as a learning resource, I think a dedicated sub-forum would be very useful.

[MachineCode]

Anyone else think it's a good idea?

An ASM forum for a Basic language? Wouldn't interest me at all.

[idle]

+1 yes it would be good to have a section for asm

[netmaestro]

I'm talking primarily about Purebasic inlined asm here, not strictly assembler for its own sake. There are times when you find a way to meet a challenge using Purebasic code and are elated until you discover that everyone else's solution runs in 1/10th of the time. Ouch. But Purebasic was designed to allow for inlined asm, mainly to deal with situations just like this. Find a bottleneck, drop to asm, return to PB code when the time is right and nobody's app will significantly outperform yours. That's the idea. But currently there's no smoke-filled room to drop into and get help and inspiration in this area. That's why I think there should be.

An ASM forum for a Basic language? Wouldn't interest me at all.

Did you really stop to look at your own username before you posted that? And, btw if you haven't noticed lately- There's nothing "basic" about Purebasic.

[moogle]

And, btw if you haven't noticed lately- There's nothing "basic" about Purebasic.

Lately? It's hasn't been for quite a while. It's funny that those who oppose new ideas for not being "basic" use things like lists, maps, interfaces, structures, prototypes, threads and loads of others

If PureBasic was "basic" I wouldn't have bought it in the first place and I doubt many others would have either.
Always the same bs by the naysayers.



On topic though I would like it if this idea was implemented.

[MachineCode]

Anyone else think it's a good idea?

When you ask a loaded question like that, you obviously want a yes/no answer. I chose no. Can't handle that?

currently there's no smoke-filled room to drop into and get help and inspiration in this area

"General Discussion: Everything else that doesn't fall into one of the other PB categories."

It's funny that those who oppose new ideas for not being "basic" use things like lists, maps, interfaces, structures, prototypes, threads and loads of others

For the record, none of my apps use lists, maps, interfaces, structures, prototypes, and loads of others. Strictly all Basic code. But, I'm not opposed to posting ASM help and code here, you know. Just the idea of an ASM area. I don't understand the question if it's a good idea anyway -- answer yes and it's still up to Fred anyway; answer no and you get flamed. <Shrugs> It's a loaded question.

[moogle]

But, I'm not opposed to posting ASM help and code here, you know. Just the idea of an ASM area. I don't understand the question if it's a good idea anyway -- answer yes and it's still up to Fred anyway; answer no and you get flamed. <Shrugs> It's a loaded question.

You have every right to say no without being flamed for not liking an idea. But if you go "no because that's not basic" then it's kind of seen as a stupid reason (well for me anyway) since PureBasic isn't just "basic" anymore, and if everyone had that idea we would not get any new features to allow users to make apps easily.

When I bought PureBasic I thought that it was made to simplify programming but also create programs that are small, efficient and fast without runtimes and extra files.

[netmaestro]

"MachineCode:" ( ) Nothing loaded at all. I explained why I think it would be useful. Btw, if you really aren't interested you wouldn't post. Posting "Doesn't interest me at all" shows a negative attitude and a veiled desire to flame. If you aren't interested, why have I heard from you? Truly, if you don't want this, let's not see a reply from you. It's no skin off you if I ask for it and get it, now is it?

I really don't appreciate getting crap like this from people I've gone out of my way to help. http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtop ... 13&t=47181

I guess you can't expect too much from someone who accepts help and then can't find the time to say a simple "thank you".

[MachineCode]

I really don't appreciate getting crap like this from people I've gone out of my way to help. http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtop ... 13&t=47181
I guess you can't expect too much from someone who accepts help and then can't find the time to say a simple "thank you".

Um, didn't thank you? Maybe you missed this part of that thread:

I don't understand what Prototypes are or what they do, but thanks for showing me how to do it (until natively supported).

[Edit] Emphasis mine in the quote above.

[Fangbeast]

I remember the number of times that there were ASM examples given out in the forum to tweak this, fix that, add features that we didn't have that saved my ass many times and I find it fascinating and useful.

Keep it coming.

[moogle]

snip...

[MachineCode]

.

[c4s]

I like the idea of an assembler sub-forum. I wonder were it would go though. "OS Specific"? Because "Miscellaneous" and "PureBasic" itself would be too far off the track, right?