HLA v1.78 is now available
spam...@crayne.org
I've just posted a new version of HLA on Webster.
HLA v1.78 includes a new @sort compile-time function that does a
quicksort using a user-defined compare operation. This dramatically
speeds up the SWITCH macro if the cases are not presorted and the
number of cases is rather large (a "bubblesort" option exists that uses
the original sort macro if you've got a huge SWITCH statement whose
cases are [mostly] sorted). I've also added an "array.lookupTable"
macro to the standard library that makes it easy to generate large
lookup tables in an associative manner (much easier to maintain).
Finally, I've fixed some problems with the Linux v1.77 release dealing
with include files and the standard library.
You can find the new download at the HLA download page:
http://webster.cs.ucr.edu/AsmTools/HLA/dnld.html
Cheers,
Randy Hyde
Assembler Standards Committee
On 2005-10-15 Randy Hyde said:
> Hi All,
> I've just posted a new version of HLA on Webster.
>
> [ ... snip ... ]
>
> You can find the new download at the HLA download page:
> http:// <flush>
> _____
> Cheers, ((( `\
> Randy Hyde _ _`\ )
(^ ) )
Oh, goodie. More nutty ~-( )
"features" to make this _'((,,,)))
unmaintainable sack of ,-' \_/ `\
road apples even more ( , |
bloaty than it is now. `-.-'`-.-'/|_|
\ / | |
I need coffee when I write =()=: / ,' aa
code. In your next release,
please include a routine to
automatically brew my coffee.
Make it a TSR. Hehe!
---
"HLA.EXE is not an assembler. Indeed, it's not even a compiler,
pre-processor (or "preparser", whatever that is), though it
*might* qualify as [a] 'text converter.'"
- Randy Hyde, author of 'HLA,'
in ALT.LANG.ASM newsgroup --
August 11, 2004
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
T.M. Sommers
> On 2005-10-15 Randy Hyde said:
>
> > Hi All,
> > I've just posted a new version of HLA on Webster.
> >
> > [ ... snip ... ]
> >
> > You can find the new download at the HLA download page:
> > http:// <flush>
>
> "features" to make this
> unmaintainable sack of
> road apples even more
> bloaty than it is now.
If it's unmaintainable, how come new versions appear every few
months?
--
Thomas M. Sommers -- t...@nj.net -- AB2SB
Annie
On 2005-10-16 t...@nj.net said:
> Assembler Standards Committee wrote:
>
> > Oh, goodie. More nutty "features" to make this
> > unmaintainable sack of road apples even more
> > bloaty than it is now.
>
> If it's unmaintainable, how come new versions appear
> every few months? _____
((( `\
For the same reason that _ _`\ )
Mikro$loth is able to (^ ) )
periodically release new ~-( )
versions of WinDoze, I _'((,,,)))
suppose. Hehe! ,-' \_/ `\
( , |
`-.-'`-.-'/|_|
\ / | |
=()=: / ,' aa
Betov
news:1129406472....@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
> Hi All,
> I've just posted a new version of HLA on Webster.
> HLA v1.78 includes a new @sort compile-time function that does a
> quicksort using a user-defined compare operation. This dramatically
> speeds up the SWITCH macro if the cases are not presorted and the
> number of cases is rather large (a "bubblesort" option exists that uses
> the original sort macro if you've got a huge SWITCH statement whose
> cases are [mostly] sorted).
Why don't you "bubble-sort" your Flex, Bison and C written
shit out, on some HLL-Pre-Parsers News-Group?
:)
Betov.
Betov
@monger.newsread.com:
Hey! You just said it, small head: He needs a couple of
months, just for having a new small toy on the top of the
shit packet.
The real problem with shit packets, is that the more you
add cherries on the cake, the more the shit packet gets
wide, and flat in the middle, you know.
:)
Betov.
Paul Dunn
> The real problem with shit packets, is that the more you
> add cherries on the cake, the more the shit packet gets
> wide, and flat in the middle, you know.
As insults go, you really are the king.
Given that any cake *should* be wide, and flat in the middle (I assume you
want it to be "flat across the top", as in the middle it can't really be
flat - it's no longer a cake then), I take it that you approve of HLA.
You might want to re-word that, as it comes across quite the opposite of how
you intended.
rand...@earthlink.net
The really amusing point in my mind is how people who know so very
little about the product seem to know what all of its faults are. I'd
say that HLA must be a pretty good product if all that its critics can
do is complain about the fact that a new version has new features (that
they don't particularly understand how to use).
BTW, for Annie's benefit, the "@sort" compile-time function added about
100 lines of code to a compiler containing well over 100,000 lines of
code. The result, just on line count alone, is therefore only 0.1% less
maintainable than it was before. Given the dramatic performance
improvement gained during the compilation of large SWITCH macros, I'll
consider that to be a big win. Sometimes, the bloat of a few hundred
bytes (out of about 1-2 million) of memory is worth it. :-)
Cheers,
Randy Hyde
rand...@earthlink.net
Betov wrote:
>
>
> Why don't you "bubble-sort" your Flex, Bison and C written
> shit out, on some HLL-Pre-Parsers News-Group?
>
I'm sorry, the "preparsers" newsgroups are for preparser products, like
RosAsm :-) HLA is an assembly language compiler (i.e., an assembler),
hence the announcement here and in CLAX.
Cheers,
Randy Hyde
rand...@earthlink.net
Paul Dunn wrote:
>
> As insults go, you really are the king.
>
> Given that any cake *should* be wide, and flat in the middle (I assume you
> want it to be "flat across the top", as in the middle it can't really be
> flat - it's no longer a cake then), I take it that you approve of HLA.
>
> You might want to re-word that, as it comes across quite the opposite of how
> you intended.
Rene's real problem is that his *assembler* (ignoring all the other
stuff inside RosAsm) is actually rather feature-poor and he has to come
up with some attack on HLA to make it seem like fewer features is a
*good thing* in an assembler. What he's attempting to do is "have his
cake and eat it, too." :-)
Cheers,
Randy Hyde
Betov
news:1129474250.8...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
Take care, ass-hole: There are still a couple of real
Assembly programmers, around there, who know what an
Assembler is, and, as long as there will be one, you
will not succeed to sell your shitty HLL Pre-Parser
under the name of Assembler without having to hear of
the deserved protestations.
:)
Betov.
Alex McDonald
> Take care, ass-hole: There are still a couple of real
> Assembly programmers, around there,
Yes, around there. Not around here, where you hang out with your louche
posts pretending to be a programmer.
> who know what an
> Assembler is,
And pretending to be arbiter of what is and isn't an assembler.
> and, as long as there will be one,
i.e you and Annie, who's so retro I'm surprised she's even got a PC.
> you
> will not succeed to sell your shitty HLL Pre-Parser
> under the name of Assembler without having to hear of
> the deserved protestations.
Jeez, give us all a break from your snotty pendantry. The last few weeks
were great; mainly because you took a break from dribbling all over your
keyboard.
--
Lack of regard
Alex McDonald
Paul Dunn
> Take care, ass-hole: There are still a couple of real
> Assembly programmers, around there, who know what an
> Assembler is, and, as long as there will be one, you
> will not succeed to sell your shitty HLL Pre-Parser
> under the name of Assembler without having to hear of
> the deserved protestations.
You need to be more public.
Everybody knows that you can't take anything said on Usenet as being gospel,
truth or even dependable. Is there a reputable publication that you could
use if you feel that assembly is in danger? People may even believe you that
way.
Annie
On 2005-10-16 Alex McDonald said:
> Betov wrote:
>
> > Take care, ass-hole: There are still a couple of real
> > Assembly programmers, around there, who know what an
> > Assembler is, and, as long as there will be one,
>
> i.e you and Annie, who's so retro I'm surprised she's even
> got a PC. _____
((( `\
Yes. I've been giving some _ _`\ )
serious thought to getting (^ ) )
a Kaypro 10. Hehe! ~-( )
_'((,,,)))
Oh. Sorry. No one here ,-' \_/ `\
comprehends that. ( , |
`-.-'`-.-'/|_|
In any case, I do agree with \ / | |
Betov's philosophy that making =()=: / ,' aa
calls to someone else's pre-
written black-box external libraries is not "real"
ASM programming.
It's like trying to create art by using a Paint-By-
Numbers [tm] kit. You might end up with a nominal
painting, but it sure as heck ain't "real" art.
Hehehe!
T.M. Sommers
>
> In any case, I do agree with
> written black-box external libraries is not "real"
> ASM programming.
You mean like BIOS calls, or int 20h calls?
I suppose you design and fabricate you own CPUs as well.
Otherwise, it wouldn't be "real" programming.
And I further suppose that you think it is not "real" carpentry
unless you make your own hammer and nails and grow your own trees.
Programming, even assembly programming, is not some form of
mysticism. It is engineering, and it should be approached as an
engineer, not as some loin-cloth-clad wacko.
Annie
On 2005-10-16 t...@nj.net said:
> Annie wrote:
>
> > In any case, I do agree with Betov's philosophy that making
> > calls to someone else's pre-written black-box external
> > libraries is not "real" ASM programming.
>
> You mean like BIOS calls, or int 20h calls?
The ROM BIOS and the O.S. API aren't external libraries.
> I suppose you design and fabricate you own CPUs as well.
> Otherwise, it wouldn't be "real" programming.
The CPU isn't an external library.
> And I further suppose that you think it is not "real" carpentry
> unless you make your own hammer and nails and grow your own trees.
Non sequitur. But not unexpected from a New Jersey-ite. Hehe!
> Programming, even assembly programming, is not some form of
> mysticism. It is engineering, and it should be approached
> as an engineer, not as some loin-cloth-clad wacko.
_____
This "engineer" approach ((( `\
is precisely what produced _ _`\ )
so much lousy software over (^ ) )
the years. ~-( )
_'((,,,)))
Good, usable software is as ,-' \_/ `\
much "art" as it is "engin- ( , |
eering." `-.-'`-.-'/|_|
\ / | |
I'd hate to drink a bottle of =()=: / ,' aa
wine that was produced solely
by "engineering."
Or read a novel, view a painting,
or watch a movie that was produced
strictly by an "engineer." Hehehe!
Betov
@monger.newsread.com:
> Programming, even assembly programming, is not some form of
> mysticism. It is engineering, and it should be approached as an
> engineer, not as some loin-cloth-clad wacko.
Take care: You are addressing "mystics" who have Megas
of Assembly Code to show!
Where are your Assembly written Applications, clown?
:)
Betov.
Barry
news:diuhle$4s2$2...@domitilla.aioe.org...
>
> Yes. I've been giving some _ _`\ )
> serious thought to getting (^ ) )
> a Kaypro 10. Hehe! ~-( )
Ah fond memories of the glorious past! I wish I still had my old Kaypro 10.
But even though I don't I can still amaze youngsters with it when I explain
that it's 10 meg hard drive had to be partitioned because the OS couldn't
handle a single drive that large. :)
I'd like to comment that this rivalry between Betov Jeckyl and Mr. Hyde,
while somewhat understandable, is pretty immature and childish and I find it
amazing that two otherwise intelligent adults are willing to sink that that
level of argumentation.
Barry
geletine
people go out there way to create, infact i think its the only HLL.
Whats wrong with frequent releases? after all software is never perfect
and never will be,its a utopian dream. How he finds the time, i will
never know.
Sligtly off topic what did you graduate in randy? I am asking as
decision time for me is approaching, i'll proberly choose single
honours in computer sciene opposed to cs and maths.
rand...@earthlink.net
geletine wrote:
> Sligtly off topic what did you graduate in randy? I am asking as
> decision time for me is approaching, i'll proberly choose single
> honours in computer sciene opposed to cs and maths.
BSCS and MSCS.
Cheers,
Randy Hyde
Annie
On 2005-10-17 ba...@aol.com said:
> "Annie" wrote:
>
> > Yes. I've been giving some serious thought to getting
> > a Kaypro 10. Hehe!
>
> Ah fond memories of the glorious past! I wish I still had my old
> Kaypro 10. But even though I don't I can still amaze youngsters
> with it when I explain that it's 10 meg hard drive had to be
> partitioned because the OS couldn't handle a single drive that
> large. :)
Yep, the K-10 was a real workhorse. Mine finally crapped out
around 1996.
> I'd like to comment that this rivalry between Betov Jeckyl and
> Mr. Hyde, while somewhat understandable, is pretty immature and
> childish and I find it amazing that two otherwise intelligent
> adults are willing to sink [to] that level of argumentation.
> _____
> Barry ((( `\
_ _`\ )
Yeah, well...Betov is French, and (^ ) )
Randy's a self-styled "academic." ~-( )
_'((,,,)))
With all that inherent arrogance ,-' \_/ `\
floating around, there's BOUND ( , |
to be fireworks. Hehe! `-.-'`-.-'/|_|
\ / | |
=()=: / ,' aa
spam...@crayne.org
other High Level Languages were generating a detailed Assembly source
code before they build the actual binary file.
Keep up the great work!
T.M. Sommers
> On 2005-10-16 t...@nj.net said:
> > Annie wrote:
> >
> > > In any case, I do agree with Betov's philosophy that making
> > > calls to someone else's pre-written black-box external
> > > libraries is not "real" ASM programming.
> >
> > You mean like BIOS calls, or int 20h calls?
>
> The ROM BIOS and the O.S. API aren't external libraries.
Oh, I see. A pre-written black box is okay if it came from
Microsoft, but not otherwise.
> > I suppose you design and fabricate you own CPUs as well.
> > Otherwise, it wouldn't be "real" programming.
>
> The CPU isn't an external library.
>
> > And I further suppose that you think it is not "real" carpentry
> > unless you make your own hammer and nails and grow your own trees.
>
> Non sequitur.
The term is 'reductio ad absurdum'.
> But not unexpected from a New Jersey-ite.
The proper term is 'New Jerseyan', and anyway I am really a
Marylander who just happens to live in NJ.
> > Programming, even assembly programming, is not some form of
> > mysticism. It is engineering, and it should be approached
> > as an engineer, not as some loin-cloth-clad wacko.
>
> This "engineer" approach
> is precisely what produced
> so much lousy software over
> the years.
Rubbish. It is failure to follow good engineering principles
that leads to lousy software, or lousy bridges or whatever.
> Good, usable software is as
> much "art" as it is "engin-
> eering."
'Art' has many meanings. It is not clear what you mean.
> I'd hate to drink a bottle of
> wine that was produced solely
> by "engineering."
I would hate to drink a bottle of wine that was produced by
ignoring sound engineering. For one thing, it would probably be
fatal.
> Or read a novel, view a painting,
> or watch a movie that was produced
> strictly by an "engineer." Hehehe!
You can only do those things because of sound engineering,
because otherwise the ink would run, the pages would fall out,
the paint would flake, and the film would be fogged.
Betov
@monger.newsread.com:
> Annie wrote:
>> On 2005-10-16 t...@nj.net said:
>> > Annie wrote:
>> >
>> > > In any case, I do agree with Betov's philosophy that making
>> > > calls to someone else's pre-written black-box external
>> > > libraries is not "real" ASM programming.
>> >
>> > You mean like BIOS calls, or int 20h calls?
>>
>> The ROM BIOS and the O.S. API aren't external libraries.
>
> Oh, I see. A pre-written black box is okay if it came from
> Microsoft, but not otherwise.
Where are your Assembly written Applications, clown?
Betov.
rand...@earthlink.net
emu...@googlemail.com wrote:
>
> On the contrary, Microsoft API functions and design isn't even a black
> box, it's a black hole, I want to look inside but I have no right to,
> and I even don't hope to see the original code... because Microsoft
> Corporation does not sell it for any price... or do they? What's the
> price?
Actually, back in the days of Windows NT 4.0 I had the full source code
sitting on my disks at school. Microsoft *has* distributed source code
to various universities and even to certain partners. However, even
back in the days of NT 4.0, the source code base was sufficiently large
that it was beyond the abilities of any one person to comprehend (it
was something like 35 million lines of code back then, undoubtedly it's
bigger today). I suspect that the easiest way for Microsoft to destroy
Linux is by giving away Windows source code. Then all the OS hackers
would waste so much time messing around with Windows source code that
they'd never have any time to do things like write alternate OSes :-)
Seriously, I spent about a week trying to find out *where* I would look
to hack distributed shared memory into the Windows kernel (forget
actually doing the work, this was time spent just finding the
appropriate source files to work on). Shortly afterwards, I decided
that hacking the Windows kernel wasn't a task I really wanted to do.
Bottom line, though, is that Windows sources *are* out there. Average
people like you and I don't have access to them (I don't have access
anymore, either), but if playing around with Windows source code is
something that you *must* do, all you really need to do is find the
right graduate program and enroll in it. Now as to whether anything
useful can come of this or not...
Cheers,
Randy Hyde
Annie
On 2005-10-19 Thomas M. Sommers <t...@nj.net> said:
> Annie wrote:
>
> > t...@nj.net said:
> >
> > > Annie wrote:
> > >
> > > > In any case, I do agree with Betov's philosophy that making
> > > > calls to someone else's pre-written black-box external
> > > > libraries is not "real" ASM programming.
> > >
> > > You mean like BIOS calls, or int 20h calls?
> >
> > The ROM BIOS and the O.S. API aren't external libraries.
>
> Oh, I see. A pre-written black box is okay if it came from
> Microsoft, but not otherwise. _____
((( `\
Nope. From Caldera. I use _ _`\ )
Caldera DR-DOS. Hehe! (^ ) )
~-( )
The hardware ROM BIOS and _'((,,,)))
the O.S. API aren't things ,-' \_/ `\
that the programmer can ( , |
control. We're pretty much `-.-'`-.-'/|_|
stuck with'em. That's reality. \ / | |
=()=: / ,' aa
But within the confines of those
constraints, the programmer DOES have discretion over
what code goes into her program. And that's where I
make the choice of knowing precisely what code I'm
using, and how it works. I reject the use of external
libraries.
You don't like it? Then "engineer" yourself a bridge,
and jump off it. Silly east-coasters. Hehehe!
Betov
@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
> The way of linking and
> overall design of HLA is comprehendible, there might be many
> possibilities of using HLA for a framework for something even more
> advanced.
Perfect demonstration that you never even read
Randall Sources.
:)
Betov.
Annie
On 2005-10-21 be...@free.fr said:
> emu...@googlemail.com écrivait:
>
> > The way of linking and overall design of HLA is comprehendible,
> > there might be many possibilities of using HLA for a framework
> > for something even more advanced.
>
> Perfect demonstration that you never even read
> Randall Sources.
> _____
> :) ((( `\
> _ _`\ )
> Betov. (^ ) )
~-( )
L'enfer, c'est les autres. _'((,,,)))
Hehe! ,-' \_/ `\
( , |
`-.-'`-.-'/|_|
Betov
> L'enfer, c'est les autres.
> Hehe! ,-' \_/ `\
> ( , |
> `-.-'`-.-'/|_|
:))
Not always.
:))
Betov.
PS.
When i was between 3 and 5 years old, it was amaizing
me, each morning, that _i_ was still... _me_. Why not
something else, was stucking me a lot.
Betov
@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
> I don't care about the mechanical part, I see the result. Results are
> perfect everything is perfect.
Now that you have ruined your reputation to death,
you don't need to care about any mechanical part:
When definitive idiots, like you, put their fingers
into any mechanical part, they usualy get wounded.
:)
[The only area where Master Pdf is perfect is as a
perfect "ass-hole" and the only way HLA is perfect
is as a "perfect shit"]
Betov.
Annie
On 2005-10-21 be...@free.fr said:
> When i was between 3 and 5 years old, it was amaizing
> me, each morning, that _i_ was still... _me_. Why not
> something else, was stucking me a lot.
_____
Yes. You might have been ((( `\
Bill Gates. Hehe! _ _`\ )
(^ ) )
Since you were formerly a ~-( )
home builder, have you seen _'((,,,)))
Bill Gates' new house? ,-' \_/ `\
( , |
It required two entire forests `-.-'`-.-'/|_|
just to provide the lumber for \ / | |
the framing. Hehehe! =()=: / ,' aa
http://www.goehner.com/gates.htm
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/tech/billgate/gates.htm
Betov
This is simply obscene.
1) The money invested in such power deliriums is stolen
money and, anyway, any man who owns that much is, by
definition a criminal.
2) There is more intelligency and technical competency
for making a good family house for less than 10,000
dollars, say, in Europe, than for building a palace
with a no limit budget.
I am more impressed by the african and arabian "home-made"
traditional houses, built with local materials, for 2 bucks,
than by such indecent insanities, that are insults to all
the US homeless people.
It sound very strange to me that a man could be vile enough
for expressing his pathetic personal "fame and glory" by
symbolic actions like these. Like with demential monthly
salaries, over some point, it becomes so far out of any
"reality" that it becomes evident that is is only left
as a power symbol, saying nothing to the others but:
"Hey look, i am 1,000,000,000 times more worthy than what
you are".
This is obscene. As you live in a retarded country where
the death may be applied to some crime, you should ask
your laws makers to register this crime in the category
of the ones that deserve the death execution.
Betov.
Annie
On 2005-10-21 be...@free.fr said:
> "Annie" écrivait:
>
> > Since you were formerly a home builder, have you seen
> > Bill Gates' new house?
> >
> > It required two entire forests just to provide the lumber
> > for the framing. Hehehe!
> >
> > http://www.goehner.com/gates.htm
> > http://www.usnews.com/usnews/tech/billgate/gates.htm
>
> This is simply obscene.
>
> 1) The money invested in such power deliriums is stolen
> money and, anyway, any man who owns that much is, by
> definition a criminal.
>
> 2) There is more intelligency and technical competency
> for making a good family house for less than 10,000
> dollars, say, in Europe, than for building a palace
> with a no limit budget.
>
> [ ... snip ... ]
>
> This is obscene. As you live in a retarded country where
> the death may be applied to some crime, you should ask
> your laws makers to register this crime in the category
> of the ones that deserve the death execution.
> _____
> Betov. ((( `\
_ _`\ )
I *KNEW* you'd like it! (^ ) )
~-( )
But, of course, it's not _'((,,,)))
quite as ostentatious as ,-' \_/ `\
Notre Dame cathedral. Hehe! ( , |
`-.-'`-.-'/|_|
Betov
@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
> HLA is a perfect example and a missing link between High Level
> Languages and the pure Assembly Language, here it's perfect and it
> proudly takes its place
We already knew that you did not read HLA sources,
and that you contributed to Master Pdf self-promotion
for the only reason that he is a pedantic ass-hole.
Now we also know that you read Right-Wing political
books and that you have no idea of what Assembly is
and of what the actual Assemblers can do.
Deeper and deeper...
Betov.
Herbert Kleebauer
> @o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
>
> > HLA is a perfect example and a missing link between High Level
> > Languages and the pure Assembly Language, here it's perfect and it
> > proudly takes its place
Finally we found someone who was missing something between a HLL
and an assembler. Maybe you can explain why you missed it.
What sense makes something between a HLL and an assembler?
Evenbit
emu...@googlemail.com wrote:
> Perfection is a relative thing.
Relatively speaking, that is... ;)
> HLA is a perfect example and a missing link between High Level
> Languages and the pure Assembly Language, here it's perfect and it
C really fits that niche too. Depends on how *high* you go when
considering HLLs, doesn't it? There are languages that make HLA seem
not so *high* at all. To me, data type declarations and coercions are
a feature of Low-Level Languages, not the other way around.
> proudly
> takes its place. Well, it may not be perfect for making Cartoons, Java
> and Flash Applets, Burning DVDs and making Multimedia Presentations,
> yet :))
Why not? When your code runs directly upon the CPU, you can take
advantage of tricks that aren't available to HLLs, thus making your
Cartoons..Multimedia..et al more lively, efficient, etc.
Nathan.
Betov
@unibwm.de:
:))
... a semi-gay toy...
:))
Betov.
Betov
@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
> To me, data type declarations and coercions are
> a feature of Low-Level Languages, not the other way around.
Mentaly deseased people are also allowed to post here.
:)
Betov.
rand...@earthlink.net
emu...@googlemail.com wrote:
> Evenbit wrote:
> > C really fits that niche too. Depends on how *high* you go when
> > considering HLLs, doesn't it?
>
>
VC++ and Borland both do this (I'm assuming by "commented" you mean
that it injects the C source code into the assembly output, clearly,
the compiler is not going to emit comments that describe what the
machine code is doing beyond this).
Cheers,
Randy Hyde
Bertrand Augereau
Intel C++ does too.
emu...@googlemail.com
> Can free version of Borland C++ Compiler (5.5) do this too?
Oops, sorry. I have version 2.01 (C) and version 1.01 (CPP) both from
Borland. Got it from here:
rand...@earthlink.net
emu8...@googlemail.com wrote:
>
> What is the procedure for MS VC?
>
> Thanks!
Use the /FA command-line option.
Cheers,
Randy Hyde
sevagK
hope to see your entire life, thousands of times over..
That really must make him 1,000,000,000 times more worthy than you.
-sevag.K
Annie
On 2005-10-21 sevagK said:
> -sevag.K _____
((( `\
<*sigh*> This subject comes up , ,`\ )
so often on Usenet that I've (^ ) )
written a "standardized" reply. ~-( )
_'((,,,)))
Here's a part of it: ,-' \_/ `\
( , |
`-.-'`-.-'/|_|
< cut'n'paste > \ / | |
=()=: / ,' aa
1. On the basis of total wealth vs. percentage donated, Gates is
a piker. The donations are, to him, chump change.
2. The monies donated to, and disbursed by, the Gates Foundation
are tax-sheltered.
3. The "philanthropy" is strictly self-serving.
A fair portion of the give-away takes the form of hardware and
software...which ultimately benefits M$ by creating even MORE
brain-dead pointee-clickee WinDoze Weenies around the world --
thus insuring a continuing Mikro$loth customer base.
But more importantly, it buys him friends and political influence.
Remember: until Mikro$loth started having major legal troubles with
the Feds (mid/late 1990s) over illegal business practices, Gates had
never given away a single dime. When he ultimately could've used
some "friends" inside The Washington D.C. Beltway, he found that he
didn't have any. That's when the Gates Foundation was formed, and
the money started flowing.
Coincidentally, that's also when Gates' corporate and personal
monetary "contributions" -- to BOTH political parties -- began.
< /cut'n'paste >
sevagK
Annie wrote:
> On 2005-10-21 sevagK said:
>
> > Bill Gates has also donated more money to charities than you can
> > ever hope to see your entire life, thousands of times over..
> > That really must make him 1,000,000,000 times more worthy than you.
> >
> > -sevag.K _____
> ((( `\
> <*sigh*> This subject comes up , ,`\ )
> so often on Usenet that I've (^ ) )
> written a "standardized" reply. ~-( )
> _'((,,,)))
> Here's a part of it: ,-' \_/ `\
> ( , |
> `-.-'`-.-'/|_|
> < cut'n'paste > \ / | |
> =()=: / ,' aa
>
> 1. On the basis of total wealth vs. percentage donated, Gates is
> a piker. The donations are, to him, chump change.
>
17+ billion is chump change. Okay. Give away ~20% of your net worth
and then come talk to me about "chump change"
> 2. The monies donated to, and disbursed by, the Gates Foundation
> are tax-sheltered.
>
Some of the donations are undoubtedly tax-sheltered. I too make
'tax-sheltered' donations through my business from time to time. So
what? It's not like he gets to keep $1.00 for every $1.00 donated.
> 3. The "philanthropy" is strictly self-serving.
>
All acts of philanthropy by anyone are self-serving. The rewards range
from public recognition to an emotional high.
> A fair portion of the give-away takes the form of hardware and
> software...which ultimately benefits M$ by creating even MORE
> brain-dead pointee-clickee WinDoze Weenies around the world --
> thus insuring a continuing Mikro$loth customer base.
>
It's great that people who whould never be able to have computers are
able to have them through Mr. Gate's charity. Have you donated some
hardware lately?
It doesn't matter if *you* don't like Windows, most people prefer
pointy-clicky vs. typing commands into a black and white console.
> But more importantly, it buys him friends and political influence.
> Remember: until Mikro$loth started having major legal troubles with
> the Feds (mid/late 1990s) over illegal business practices, Gates had
> never given away a single dime. When he ultimately could've used
> some "friends" inside The Washington D.C. Beltway, he found that he
> didn't have any. That's when the Gates Foundation was formed, and
> the money started flowing.
>
> Coincidentally, that's also when Gates' corporate and personal
> monetary "contributions" -- to BOTH political parties -- began.
>
Yes, part of the reward. The reasons or motives don't make a bit of
difference to all the people getting helped.
Bill Gates is a business man who became successful. Perhaps too
successful and success always draws anger and envy from some who don't
have it. It's not enough to knock him for his success, you have to
knock him for his philanthropy too.
-sevag.K
Annie
On 2005-10-21 sevagK said:
> <snip>
>
> Bill Gates is a business man who became successful. Perhaps too
> successful and success always draws anger and envy from some who
> don't have it. It's not enough to knock him for his success, you
> have to knock him for his philanthropy too.
> _____
> -sevag.K ((( `\
_ _`\ )
You seem to hold an underlying (^ ) )
assumption that philanthropy ~-( )
is, in itself, always a good _'((,,,)))
thing. ,-' \_/ `\
( , |
That may or may not be true. `-.-'`-.-'/|_|
Looking at America's welfare \ / | |
system as it's presently =()=: / ,' aa
constituted might lead some
to reject that assumption.
In any case, I live in Bill Gates' "back yard," so to speak.
I've had the opportunity to see him operate at relatively
close range.
It's my perception that his philanthropy is disingenuous.
Bill is fundamentally an apolitical nerd with megaloman-
ical overtones...which were exacerbated by his success.
All indications are that The Gates Foundation was mostly,
if not solely, the brainchild of Melinda. Without her
influence, and left to his own devices, it's questionable
that Bill would ever have underwritten that foundation.
In placating Melinda's naive impulses, I'm betting that
Bill "stacked the deck" in ways that would bring him the
the greatest possible benefit...both financially, and
PR-wise. Can't prove it at the moment, but that would be
in keeping with his established operating procedure, from
his first beginnings to the present day.
Then, too, one would be well-advised to look at the recip-
ients of the largesse, and try to determine the efficacious-
ness of the donations. A portion of the foundation's money
has gone right down rat holes. Like (to cite one example)
the donations of computers and software to African villages
that DIDN'T EVEN HAVE ELECTRICITY to run the computers.
Nevertheless, the mere fact of the donation ITSELF got Bill
a lot of mileage with the politically-correct crowd...even
though the donations were essentially worthless in actually
"helping people."
Naturally, you're free to perceive and believe whatever you'd
like, for whatever reasons. And I require the same privilege.
So we'll have to agree to disagree. Hehe!
Paul Dunn
> On 2005-10-21 sevagK said:
>
> > Bill Gates has also donated more money to charities than you can
> > ever hope to see your entire life, thousands of times over..
> > That really must make him 1,000,000,000 times more worthy than
> you. >
> > -sevag.K _____
> ((( `\
> <*sigh*> This subject comes up , ,`\ )
> so often on Usenet that I've (^ ) )
> written a "standardized" reply. ~-( )
> _'((,,,)))
> Here's a part of it: ,-' \_/ `\
> ( , |
> `-.-'`-.-'/|_|
> < cut'n'paste > \ / | |
> =()=: / ,' aa
>
> 1. On the basis of total wealth vs. percentage donated, Gates is
> a piker. The donations are, to him, chump change.
So you disagree with giving your spare change to charity then? You're a very
public-spirited person.
> 2. The monies donated to, and disbursed by, the Gates Foundation
> are tax-sheltered.
So the money he gives out isn't taxed? Or taxed less heavily? How is that a
problem? Sounds quite a nice thing that they've done.
> 3. The "philanthropy" is strictly self-serving.
'course it is. That's the whole point - you get a nice feeling when you
donate. Why should that be wrong?
> A fair portion of the give-away takes the form of hardware and
> software...which ultimately benefits M$ by creating even MORE
> brain-dead pointee-clickee WinDoze Weenies around the world --
> thus insuring a continuing Mikro$loth customer base.
Pah, you're just jealous because nobody wants to do things your way. And
it's not surprising really.
Barry
news:djct8v$gnm$1...@domitilla.aioe.org...
>
> You seem to hold an underlying (^ ) )
> assumption that philanthropy ~-( )
> is, in itself, always a good _'((,,,)))
> thing. ,-' \_/ `\
> ( , |
> That may or may not be true. `-.-'`-.-'/|_|
> Looking at America's welfare \ / | |
> system as it's presently =()=: / ,' aa
> constituted might lead some
> to reject that assumption.
It's a bad system, as are most government systems. But it does some good.
> In any case, I live in Bill Gates' "back yard," so to speak.
> I've had the opportunity to see him operate at relatively
> close range.
>
> It's my perception that his philanthropy is disingenuous.
> Bill is fundamentally an apolitical nerd with megaloman-
> ical overtones...which were exacerbated by his success.
Can you tell us something that you see living in his backyard that leads you
to these conclusions that the rest of us, farther away, don't get to see?
> All indications are that The Gates Foundation was mostly,
> if not solely, the brainchild of Melinda. Without her
> influence, and left to his own devices, it's questionable
> that Bill would ever have underwritten that foundation.
>
> In placating Melinda's naive impulses, I'm betting that
> Bill "stacked the deck" in ways that would bring him the
> the greatest possible benefit...both financially, and
> PR-wise. Can't prove it at the moment, but that would be
> in keeping with his established operating procedure, from
> his first beginnings to the present day.
Who cares why he does it? He does it. He's spending huge sums of money to
try to reduce disease and that is a good thing. If he also benefits in some
way, so what? I suspect he could invest that money and benefit even more
but even if he couldn't, why do we care? It's his money.
Should we maybe tell the people who didn't get some disease because of Bills
efforts to get themselves infected because he wasn't being kind after all?
I wonder if they'd agree?
I certainly agree that Microsoft got too powerful but he also popularized
computers and put a lot of us to work or helped us who were already in the
business to make more. Yes, you can point out reasons we might have done
even better if he'd done things differently but I'm sure we wouldn't have
done as well if he hadn't done anything at all.
Barry
Betov
news:aa78a$435a45a4$d86014ef$25...@ALLTEL.NET:
> Who cares why he does it? He does it. He's spending huge sums of
> money to try to reduce disease and that is a good thing. If he also
> benefits in some way, so what? I suspect he could invest that money
> and benefit even more but even if he couldn't, why do we care? It's
> his money.
>
> Should we maybe tell the people who didn't get some disease because of
> Bills efforts to get themselves infected because he wasn't being kind
> after all? I wonder if they'd agree?
>
> I certainly agree that Microsoft got too powerful but he also
> popularized computers and put a lot of us to work or helped us who
> were already in the business to make more. Yes, you can point out
> reasons we might have done even better if he'd done things differently
> but I'm sure we wouldn't have done as well if he hadn't done anything
> at all.
When reading such incredible nazi deliriums, from mentaly
deseased criminals deprived of any political, ethical and
historical sense, i fall short in arguments.
Betov.
Alex McDonald
>
> When reading such incredible nazi deliriums, from mentaly
> deseased criminals deprived of any political, ethical and
> historical sense, i fall short in arguments.
>
Try dialectics. Every good Marxist knows how.
--
Regards
Alex McDonald
Herbert Kleebauer
> > > What sense makes something between a HLL and an assembler?
>
> The same sense as a detailed listing makes for assembler, for example
> MACHINE CODE <- SOURCE.
> for C compiler it should be "ASSEMBLY CODE <- SOURCE."
> and there should be line numbers and some limited comments (more
> comments - better), like variable names etc...
>
> I think, this may help to understand what those HLL do...
You want to understand how a HLL compiler converts the
HLL statements into assembler code and because HLA is
a very primitive HLL and also adds some comments to the
generate assembly program it is easier to understand
than the code generated by the "grown up" HLL's. If the
author of HLA also says, that this is the purpose of HLA
(and removes the "A" from "HLA"), then I'm pretty sure
that all attacks against HLA will immediately stop.
But how does HLA help you to learn assembly programming?
Evenbit
Betov wrote:
>
> Mentaly deseased people are also allowed to post here.
>
Well, if you people insist... by all means, continue... ;-)
Nathan.
Evenbit
emu...@googlemail.com wrote:
> Evenbit wrote:
> >
> > Well, if you people insist... by all means, continue... ;-)
> >
>
>
> to the universities to defend it, knowing that they had always boasted
> of their devotion to the cause of truth; but, no, the universities
> immediately were silenced. Then I looked to the great editors of the
> newspapers whose flaming editorials in days gone by had proclaimed
> their love of freedom; but they, like the universities, were silenced
> in a few short weeks... Only the Church stood squarely across the path
> of Hitler's campaign for suppressing truth. I never had any special
> interest in the Church before, but now I feel a great affection and
> admiration because the Church alone has had the courage and persistence
> to stand for intellectual truth and moral freedom. I am forced thus to
> confess that what I once despised I now praise unreservedly.
>
> -- Albert Einstein
>
That was a situation in which Facism suppressed people's demands for
freedom. The Church has a natural tendency to fight against any
competition for control of people's minds.
Nathan.
sevagK
Annie wrote:
> On 2005-10-21 sevagK said:
>
> > <snip>
> >
> > Bill Gates is a business man who became successful. Perhaps too
> > successful and success always draws anger and envy from some who
> > don't have it. It's not enough to knock him for his success, you
> > have to knock him for his philanthropy too.
> > _____
> > -sevag.K ((( `\
> _ _`\ )
> You seem to hold an underlying (^ ) )
> assumption that philanthropy ~-( )
> is, in itself, always a good _'((,,,)))
> thing. ,-' \_/ `\
Actions don't fit in to what is good or what is bad. The outcome is
judged. One can go out to do "good" and end up doing "bad" or vice
versa.
> In any case, I live in Bill Gates' "back yard," so to speak.
> I've had the opportunity to see him operate at relatively
> close range.
>
> It's my perception that his philanthropy is disingenuous.
> Bill is fundamentally an apolitical nerd with megaloman-
> ical overtones...which were exacerbated by his success.
>
[snip]
I have no love for Bill Gates. I know he has taken the concept of
Capitalism beyone the limitations set by law. If he used money to buy
out politicians, fine. If he doesn't do it, his competitors will. The
problem doesn't lie in businessmen buying politicians... the problem
lies with the corrupt politicans we ellect.
My response was directed to Rene who called Gate's 'action' of building
a palace a 'criminal' act followed by other diatribe without once
mentioning some of the good that has come about as a result of Gates's
actions. The simple fact is, even if you, Rene and I together gave
away every cent we earn from now till grave, we would not even come
close to matching the good that has resulted from Gates.
> So we'll have to agree to disagree. Hehe!
Yes, that seems to be the natural outcome between our conversations. :)
-sevag.K
T.M. Sommers
> "Measuring programming progress by lines of code is like measuring
> aircraft building progress by weight."
>
> -- Bill Gates
Too much weight, like too many lines of code, causes it to crash.
--
Thomas M. Sommers -- t...@nj.net -- AB2SB
T.M. Sommers
> T.M. Sommers wrote:
>
>>Too much weight, like too many lines of code, causes it to crash.
>
Windows.
rand...@earthlink.net
emu...@googlemail.com wrote:
> So, the quantity of lines does not really matter, it's the quality what
> really matters.
Then again, you can get away with considerably less quality on a system
that has only a few lines of code, but there is *no way* you can get
away with lax quality on a system with a large number of lines of code.
I'm assuming here that you mean "robust," "well-designed," and/or
"correct" when you use the term "quality".
As code quality is often measured using terms like "defects per
thousand lines of code" you can see that the issues of quality and
program size aren't necessarily independent. If you maintain an
extremely high quality standard of, say, one defect per thousand lines
of code, then a program with 1,000 lines will typically have only one
defect, whereas a million line program will have 1,000 defects. In an
absolute sense, therefore, the lines of code *do* matter.
Cheers,
Randy Hyde
P.S. BTW, few programmers or organizations achieve a quality level like
one defect per thousand lines of code. 4-5 defects/KLOC is considered
pretty good. And many organizations are in the 10 defects/KLOC range.
Most of the code you see posted to a newsgroup like this one is *way*
off the charts (in the *bad* direction).
T.M. Sommers
> T.M. Somers wrote:
>
>>Windows.
>
> This is not an example (more lines -> crash).
>
> By example I mean a code that by adding a few innocent lines will
> crash.
Of course it is an example--of what I meant. If you hadn't
snipped so much context, you would understand.
T.M. Sommers
>>snipped so much context, you would understand.
>
> mean.
If you did not snip all the context, everyone would understand.
T.M. Sommers
> T.M. Sommers wrote:
>
>>If you did not snip all the context, everyone would understand.
>
>
> (everyone - 1) != (everyone)
I understand two things: what my--repeat MY--original point was,
and that no one, including you, can follow this so-called
discussion because you keep snipping all the context.
T.M. Sommers
> T.M. Sommers wrote:
>
>>I understand two things: what my--repeat MY--original point was,
>>and that no one, including you, can follow this so-called
>>discussion because you keep snipping all the context.
>
I do. It is you who keeps snipping it, as you have done again.
> and show us some real
> example, so that we can test it. Context does not matter here, we need
> results. Results.
What are you babbling about? On second thought, don't bother
answering.
T.M. Sommers
Paul Dunn
> T.M. Sommers wrote:
>> I do. It is you who keeps snipping it, as you have done again.
>
> I need no context. It either works or it doesn't.
> Don't tell me what to do, please. I answer according to previous
> context, if you dare, please check the local copy of the message tree.
I think that the problem lies with those of us that don't use a newsreader
which has a "tree" view. I use Outlook Express, and have turned off the
tree-view for a very good reason.
So for people who don't have a tree view to peruse, we have to scroll back
up the list to find what post you might possibly have replied to - and
that's not easy in a thread this size.
Keeping the last message or so's relevant parts provides a context for us to
hang your replies on.