On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 02:07:36 GMT, mark r rivet <spamtrap@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>On Tue, 08 Apr 2008 02:32:13 GMT, Frank Kotler <spamtrap@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>wrote:
>
>>mark r rivet wrote:
>>> I'm new to assembly programming except for z80 coarse I took in the
>>> 80's. So I downloaded: Nasm, Nasmide, Alink and have the book
>>> "Assembly Language step by step with Dos and Linux". Is this good or
>>> do I need something else.
>Or start off "Step by Step" and see where it takes you!
>>
>>Best,
>>Frank
>
>
>Thanks alot Frank. Let me explain the reason for my new interest in
>assembly. I have been running this really old dos screen saver called
>"Dazzle" you can find it on the net by searching for Dazzle50.zip. I
>have run this most amazing program since the days of the 286, 1980 or
>so.Anyway 20 years later I am still amazed when I look at it. I need
>to know what makes it tick. I don't have the source code, so I want to
>disassemble the .exe and study it. I have the disassembler IDA. it
>disassembled nicely. Now I just need a crash course in assembly. But
>from what Ican gather from the disassembly, it's a sixteen bit
>program. It would make me very happy to understand this code and ****t
>it to 32bit and help to immortalize this freaking great code. Maybe
>you could download this program and give me some help with this. One
>way or another, I have to understand this code. I just have to!
I just got curious, so I found a couple of copies. Some problems you
are going to encounter trying to make sense of the program are:
a) it's PKLited, with extract disabled.
b) after fixing a), it's a 200+k exe,
c) written in "Borland C++ - Copyright 1991 Borland Intl."
d) with embedded compressed pcx files. (apparently)
With all that, even if you did sort it all out and rewrite as a 32 bit
program, it would need to be modified to run as a windows screensaver
(if that's what you intended), and it wouldn't run as a DOS program
anyway.
I once tackled a 64k program because I wanted a 32-bit version. It
took me 10 years or so of part time work to get it to just reassemble
REASONLBLELY correctly as a 16-bit program. It became easier to just
rewrite it as a new 32-bit program. And that's still not done.
I have disassenbled 200+K programs so I could get an idea of how they
worked. It takes a LOT of time.
Good luck.
--
ArarghMail804 at [drop the 'http://www.'
from ->] http://www.arargh.com
BCET Basic Compiler Page: http://www.arargh.com/basic/index.html
To reply by email, remove the extra stuff from the reply address.
|
