OSDev.org

Alexey1994 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2024 7:41 am nasm sucks. There are a lot of bugs even for the old 386.

Bugs in NASM? Care to share your findings?

alexfru wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2024 9:41 am

Alexey1994 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2024 7:41 am nasm sucks. There are a lot of bugs even for the old 386.

Bugs in NASM? Care to share your findings?

No. They had 30 years to do well.

So there are no bugs in NASM.

Octocontrabass wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2024 10:16 pm So there are no bugs in NASM.

All sophists must die out.

Donald Knuth paid $2.50 for every first report of an error in The Art of Computer Programming.

Would you be willing to make a similar offer for your perfect assembler?

iansjack wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2024 12:14 am Donald Knuth paid $2.50 for every first report of an error in The Art of Computer Programming.

Would you be willing to make a similar offer for your perfect assembler?

I have 2.5 dollars. And I won’t agree to fix errors in poorly written Nasm code for such ridiculous money. I might have thought $1000.

As for my code, I don't recommend trying to contribute to it to anyone who is not a professional, and there aren't many of them, and they all work at Microsoft or are already retired and definitely don't need the money.

I don't need mediocrity. I'm awesome myself. Contribute to Linux and other garbage.

I was talking about your assembler. As it's perfect you could make the offer secure in the knowledge that no-one could claim their $2.50.

We've already established that you can't point out any errors in nasm.

iansjack wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2024 1:39 am I was talking about your assembler. As it's perfect you could make the offer secure in the knowledge that no-one could claim their $2.50.

We've already established that you can't point out any errors in nasm.

What the sophists establish does not matter. I have already established perfectly that you are a bad person. But I can also add something. Then you will have dreams in which your filthy essence will intensify. And you will become an even worse person.

Unfortunately, your assembler fail to compile.

Ho hum.

iansjack wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2024 2:50 am Unfortunately, your assembler fail to compile.

Ho hum.

Everything is compiled for you. There are so few dependencies that even wine will run it.

iansjack wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2024 2:50 am Unfortunately, your assembler fail to compile.

I believe that is a feature, not a bug

You know someone has reached the pinnacle of their C programming career when...

MichaelPetch wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2024 11:40 am

iansjack wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2024 2:50 am Unfortunately, your assembler fail to compile.

I believe that is a feature, not a bug

No, it's just that the first step in compiling my programs is to install Windows. Linux devices are not capable of such a feat.

The translation is so cute, I'll leave it like that.

MichaelPetch wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2024 11:55 am You know someone has reached the pinnacle of their C programming career when...

Code: Select all

#include <types.c>
#include <data-structures/dynamic-stack.c>
#include <string.c>

#include "link.c"
#include "tokener.c"
#include "parser.c"
#include "generator.c"

Please don't be stupid.

https://github.com/Alexey1994/tcc-libs

But yes, there are old libraries here.

Whoosh!