Terence wrote:
> I'm posting this because there is little trafic and I am curious.
>
> I get to see various forms of "assembler" source code.
>
> Some i understand, but neither my NASM nor IBM ASM assemblers
> understand the code. Others are like an alien language with no
> references to AX,BX,CD,DX,SI, DI and EAX EBX, ECX, EDX,EDSI, EDI and
> so on, but to r0 through r7? and s0 and so on.
>
> Anybody care to comment on:-
> a) what is the above weird assembly language and what do you assemle
> it with?
It may be Herbert's assembly syntax. Many non-x86 architectures also
have this syntax, i.e., register numbering instead of naming.
Unless we know what specific syntax it is, an assembler cannot be
suggested. Can you present a sample of what you are talking about?
> b) where can I find TASM (I had it and it's gone; whereas I seem to
> still have everything else.
It's not under sale separately. It, I think, used to come with Borland
C++ builder and Borland Delphi. I don't know if it is still ****pped. I
don't think TASM is maintained for a long time now. Choose a more upto
date assembler like MASM or NASM or WASM.
> c) I have MASM 6.14, NASM v07, Nasm V08, WinDasm, Win32asm.
> I work privately (fun) for DOS and DOS emulation targets, and
> commercially for Windows native code targets (terribly complex - why?)
> Which of the above assemblers are to be recommended, (if any) and
> why?
Well they all have their pros and cons. I usually use and find NASM
sufficient. Sometimes I use GAS.
> d) if code starts ".386" or ".486", what assembler understands this
> syntax?
MASM for one does. I think TASM will too in MASM emulation.
Others may know about more assemblers that accept this directive.
|
