Why nobody continue Asmone/AsmPro development ?

kamelito · 24 March 2007, 15:13

Hi,

There's the source code of Asmpro available, TFA own the source of AsmOne.
I don't understand why these two assemblers are no longuer being developed.
Maybe because Devpac is better, or macro68k, or Barfly even PhxAss...
But what about having these natively running on AmigaOS4, Morphos and made them X86 compatible for Aros...

kamelito

mailman · 24 March 2007, 15:35

No longer? Recently a new, bug-fixed version of AsmPro has been released. Grab it from here.

Of course it is not exactly what you have been expecting but I guess assembler coding is not so efficient nowadays. It is also less compatible in case of cross-compiling and stuff.

Ultron · 24 March 2007, 15:41

68k != PPC\X86

kamelito · 24 March 2007, 16:36

1.17 is 2 years old, sure if your coding for A500/1200 then it doesn't need to be better, but we're in 2007, so why not expending these assembler to 2007 standards.
68K §= PPC/X86 but Amiga are Amiga, being A500 or AmigaOne, even Pegasos and PC running Aros IMHO.

Kamelito

mailman · 24 March 2007, 16:43

Quote:

1.17 is 2 years old,

But the archive I gave you a link to contains binary from February 07 which constitutes of some fixes. So it is not 2 years old but no more than two months. Don't be fooled by the number

StingRay · 24 March 2007, 17:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by kamelito

Hi,

There's the source code of Asmpro available, TFA own the source of AsmOne.
I don't understand why these two assemblers are no longuer being developed.
Maybe because Devpac is better, or macro68k, or Barfly even PhxAss...
But what about having these natively running on AmigaOS4, Morphos and made them X86 compatible for Aros...

kamelito

I can answer that question: Check the AsmPro source and you know why... No further comments needed!

alexh · 24 March 2007, 19:03

Who bets cameltoe cannot even code?

kamelito · 24 March 2007, 19:55

>Who bets cameltoe cannot even code? (I can write at least

)

I can even if many more can code better. I only made patchs on the Amiga, I made the first patch to remove the border starting with AmigaOS 2.0. It was stuck on my harddrive for years until a friend of mine ask me to put it on Aminet (many more copied it with or without greetings). I made several one parts, 2 cracks (Fernandez must die, easy one and TVPaint). For TVpaint I ask the guy to do not spread it. Then many muzaks rips. I start a prog to modify Amiga screen modes until someone made Newmodes. I'm kind of lazy so I start many things and don't finish many. The latest project started on the Amiga was a port of SuperSprint...The only thing I made was to ressource the Atari version who was then reassembled on Atari to see if it run OK. The code produced was the same. I sent the source to 2 persons of this board but heard nothing back.
So I can code, but the best thing to do IMHO is to replicate Asmone/Pro interfarce and use external assembler so the code can be portable. It would be simpler. (again IMHO)

Kamelito.

Ultron · 24 March 2007, 22:04

Assembler isn't portable, it's directly dependant on CPU architecture...

Ultron · 24 March 2007, 22:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by kamelito

68K §= PPC/X86 but Amiga are Amiga, being A500 or AmigaOne, even Pegasos and PC running Aros IMHO.

No, they're completely different machines. The only thing in common in the Amiga brand. I guess AmigaOS 4.0 or MorphOS can run emulated 68k, then again so can WinUAE

AROS can't, that i know of. Thus there's no point on porting an Assembler, because the code run would be emulated, or possibility, since we're dealing with three totally different CPU architectures.

kamelito · 24 March 2007, 22:37

Sure for me too the Amiga are A1000/500/CDTV/2000/3000/600/1200/4000...
Mostly because of Nostalgia, AmigaOS4, Morphos, ARos are Amiga because they're to some degree highly compatible OS wise to AmigaOS 3.1 (not HW wise).
Why not rewrote the Window/input/ouput.. stuff in C, like creating an IDE then use vasm assembler to produce the code for all the processors we want ?
Sure it will be slower on classic Amiga, but they'll be better for the future and now most good C compiler do produce a better code than a human. (that's another topic, many will not agree, sure it may not be true for 68k but look at G5 multicore processor, bi-core, quad-core etc.)

vasm : http://sun.hasenbraten.de/vasm/

Kamelito

alexh · 25 March 2007, 01:05

Any REAL Amiga programmer wouldnt be asking these questions.

Portable assembler

It must suck at handling flags, interrupts, exceptions, stacks etc. Anything very CPU specific.

kamelito · 25 March 2007, 11:51

That's not what I'm trying to say. I'm not saying we should have a portable assembler like HLA on the PC, but a front end with an assembler capable of producing the code your intended to do.
If I do 68k then I write 68k code and assemble it, the end result would be 68k code etc.
Handling interrupt, exceptions etc... is plateform specific, you can, on the Amiga do that by using the OS or the HW registers. A portable assembler can do that because it support Amiga 68K, Amiga PPC (vasm case) so there's no problem here.

Kamelito

mailman · 25 March 2007, 12:41

What stopping you from using ASMPro 1.17 then? Do you see some flaws in it which annoys you? So far you haven't elaborated why you are so desperately frustrated due to discontinued development of this tool.

kamelito · 25 March 2007, 13:07

Of course I can use it, but if I remember correctly work was ongoing to make it portable. First by separating code in modules, then rewrote them in C. (mailing list)
This is the part that annoy me, it seems that the C64 community do more than the Amiga one. (I love both, mostly the SID on C64)
I'll try to do what I'm saying, by using existing parts available on Aminet to build something similar but portable. But it'll take a long time since my free time is limited.

Kamelito

StingRay · 25 March 2007, 13:26

If you so desperately want to have a portable AsmPro, then instead of blaming Amiga coders for doing nothing, you should do it yourself. Several very good coders tried to improve/bugfix AsmPro (Blueberry, Hitchhikr to name a few) and they all gave up after a while as the AsmPro source is the biggest mess you can imagine. Try to update AsmPro yourself and I am sure you won't be asking such questions anymore...

kamelito · 25 March 2007, 15:08

It seems that you wrote your post SingRay before reading mine (#15)...
I don't blame anybody, its because its a mess that it should be redone and one guy wrote once, "the best coders I know are the one who reuse code instead of reinventing the wheel".
Kamelito

25 March 2007, 01:05	#12
alexh Thalion Webshrine Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Oxford Posts: 14,330	Any REAL Amiga programmer wouldnt be asking these questions. Portable assembler It must suck at handling flags, interrupts, exceptions, stacks etc. Anything very CPU specific. Last edited by alexh; 25 March 2007 at 01:31.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
ASMPro info bar thingy	bodhi	Coders. Asm / Hardware	3	29 July 2013 10:43
AsmPro	copse	Coders. Asm / Hardware	4	25 April 2012 11:41
AsmPro sources question(s)	Asman	Coders. General	13	03 September 2010 12:21
AsmPro	CmdrVimes	Coders. General	5	01 September 2010 12:40
AsmOne even directive...?	pmc	Coders. General	30	04 December 2009 09:33

24 March 2007, 15:13	#1
kamelito Zone Friend Join Date: May 2006 Location: France Posts: 1,801	Why nobody continue Asmone/AsmPro development ? Hi, There's the source code of Asmpro available, TFA own the source of AsmOne. I don't understand why these two assemblers are no longuer being developed. Maybe because Devpac is better, or macro68k, or Barfly even PhxAss... But what about having these natively running on AmigaOS4, Morphos and made them X86 compatible for Aros... kamelito

24 March 2007, 15:35	#2
mailman Zone Friend Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Warsaw/Poland Age: 45 Posts: 2,427	No longer? Recently a new, bug-fixed version of AsmPro has been released. Grab it from here. Of course it is not exactly what you have been expecting but I guess assembler coding is not so efficient nowadays. It is also less compatible in case of cross-compiling and stuff.

24 March 2007, 15:41	#3
Ultron Something Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Amigaland, Nostalgia Age: 48 Posts: 757	68k != PPC\X86

24 March 2007, 16:36	#4
kamelito Zone Friend Join Date: May 2006 Location: France Posts: 1,801	1.17 is 2 years old, sure if your coding for A500/1200 then it doesn't need to be better, but we're in 2007, so why not expending these assembler to 2007 standards. 68K §= PPC/X86 but Amiga are Amiga, being A500 or AmigaOne, even Pegasos and PC running Aros IMHO. Kamelito

24 March 2007, 19:03	#7
alexh Thalion Webshrine Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Oxford Posts: 14,330	Who bets cameltoe cannot even code?

24 March 2007, 19:55	#8
kamelito Zone Friend Join Date: May 2006 Location: France Posts: 1,801	>Who bets cameltoe cannot even code? (I can write at least ) I can even if many more can code better. I only made patchs on the Amiga, I made the first patch to remove the border starting with AmigaOS 2.0. It was stuck on my harddrive for years until a friend of mine ask me to put it on Aminet (many more copied it with or without greetings). I made several one parts, 2 cracks (Fernandez must die, easy one and TVPaint). For TVpaint I ask the guy to do not spread it. Then many muzaks rips. I start a prog to modify Amiga screen modes until someone made Newmodes. I'm kind of lazy so I start many things and don't finish many. The latest project started on the Amiga was a port of SuperSprint...The only thing I made was to ressource the Atari version who was then reassembled on Atari to see if it run OK. The code produced was the same. I sent the source to 2 persons of this board but heard nothing back. So I can code, but the best thing to do IMHO is to replicate Asmone/Pro interfarce and use external assembler so the code can be portable. It would be simpler. (again IMHO) Kamelito.

24 March 2007, 22:04	#9
Ultron Something Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Amigaland, Nostalgia Age: 48 Posts: 757	Assembler isn't portable, it's directly dependant on CPU architecture...

24 March 2007, 22:37	#11
kamelito Zone Friend Join Date: May 2006 Location: France Posts: 1,801	Sure for me too the Amiga are A1000/500/CDTV/2000/3000/600/1200/4000... Mostly because of Nostalgia, AmigaOS4, Morphos, ARos are Amiga because they're to some degree highly compatible OS wise to AmigaOS 3.1 (not HW wise). Why not rewrote the Window/input/ouput.. stuff in C, like creating an IDE then use vasm assembler to produce the code for all the processors we want ? Sure it will be slower on classic Amiga, but they'll be better for the future and now most good C compiler do produce a better code than a human. (that's another topic, many will not agree, sure it may not be true for 68k but look at G5 multicore processor, bi-core, quad-core etc.) vasm : http://sun.hasenbraten.de/vasm/ Kamelito

25 March 2007, 11:51	#13
kamelito Zone Friend Join Date: May 2006 Location: France Posts: 1,801	That's not what I'm trying to say. I'm not saying we should have a portable assembler like HLA on the PC, but a front end with an assembler capable of producing the code your intended to do. If I do 68k then I write 68k code and assemble it, the end result would be 68k code etc. Handling interrupt, exceptions etc... is plateform specific, you can, on the Amiga do that by using the OS or the HW registers. A portable assembler can do that because it support Amiga 68K, Amiga PPC (vasm case) so there's no problem here. Kamelito

25 March 2007, 12:41	#14
mailman Zone Friend Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Warsaw/Poland Age: 45 Posts: 2,427	What stopping you from using ASMPro 1.17 then? Do you see some flaws in it which annoys you? So far you haven't elaborated why you are so desperately frustrated due to discontinued development of this tool.

25 March 2007, 13:07	#15
kamelito Zone Friend Join Date: May 2006 Location: France Posts: 1,801	Of course I can use it, but if I remember correctly work was ongoing to make it portable. First by separating code in modules, then rewrote them in C. (mailing list) This is the part that annoy me, it seems that the C64 community do more than the Amiga one. (I love both, mostly the SID on C64) I'll try to do what I'm saying, by using existing parts available on Aminet to build something similar but portable. But it'll take a long time since my free time is limited. Kamelito

25 March 2007, 13:26	#16
StingRay move.l #$c0ff33,throat Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Berlin/Joymoney Posts: 6,863	If you so desperately want to have a portable AsmPro, then instead of blaming Amiga coders for doing nothing, you should do it yourself. Several very good coders tried to improve/bugfix AsmPro (Blueberry, Hitchhikr to name a few) and they all gave up after a while as the AsmPro source is the biggest mess you can imagine. Try to update AsmPro yourself and I am sure you won't be asking such questions anymore...

25 March 2007, 15:08	#17
kamelito Zone Friend Join Date: May 2006 Location: France Posts: 1,801	It seems that you wrote your post SingRay before reading mine (#15)... I don't blame anybody, its because its a mess that it should be redone and one guy wrote once, "the best coders I know are the one who reuse code instead of reinventing the wheel". Kamelito

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)