which is it?

and yes, i want to use NASM and not MASM lol anyways i have a MASM IDE already but it doesnt support NASM :(

so thanks in advance
Posted on 2003-11-23 19:04:36 by chimaira
There are two that I know of - RadASM can use NASM, it is a very good IDE. NaGoA is a dedicated NASM IDE that can be downloaded for free from the following URL

http://www.visual-assembler.pt.vu/
Posted on 2003-11-24 00:26:12 by donkey
chimaira,

RadAsm is the best IDE. No need to bother with nagoa. RadAsm is coded with assembly unlike Nagoa which was done with a VHLL i think :) I am curious about your reasons for using nasm. Have you looked at fasm?
Posted on 2003-11-24 00:38:52 by Odyssey
actually when asking some questions in #assembly at irc.ptnet.org i ended up being answered by the guy who made NAGOA.
he told me does not even know C, only knows asm and learnt almost it all by reverse engeneering so i believe NAGOA was actually made in assembly.

he told me too that MASM is more high level than NASM but i couldn't quite get the point...could anyone explain me the advantages/disvantages of NASM/MASM? and as i am going to learn asm i want the lowest level possible(and no i dont want machine code :grin: ).

thanks in advance

ah and about NAGOA i found it a bit complicated so ill try out the other one

also i found that programming MASM for windows at least at a first glance really looks like programming in C for windows
Posted on 2003-11-24 02:03:53 by chimaira
Hi,

I don't quite understand what he means by it being lower level. Both are capable of writing opcodes and having them assembled into a Win32 executable, hell in MASM you can actually code directly in HEX if you want. If he means that there are fewer high level tools available to you that sounds more like a limitation rather than a feature. You have to watch out for this kind of thing in assembler forums, many people will discuss the limitations of an assembler as if they were features, all assemblers are capable of translating a mnemonic to an opcode, that is final. Whether you choose to use the high level constructs is your choice but it is always better to have that choice than to be denied it because of some assembler authors views on the way he thinks you should write code. There are many assemblers that claim they are more low level than another and to me that has always been a sort of sign that it is not really worth looking at, I mean who are they to tell me what my code should look like ? If you are just starting out the choice of an assembler should dpend on the availability of example code and for that MASM wins hands down, there is no substitute for a good tutorial and MASM has the most by far. I am not disparaging NASM here, just that I find comments like that one stupid and basically self serving in an effort to hide inadequacies.
Posted on 2003-11-24 02:14:04 by donkey

actually when asking some questions in #assembly at irc.ptnet.org i ended up being answered by the guy who made NAGOA.
he told me does not even know C, only knows asm and learnt almost it all by reverse engeneering so i believe NAGOA was actually made in assembly.



NAGOA is 6+ MB. It cannot be maded on Low Level Language(LLL). It must be on High Level language(HLL) like C. FASM IDE skeleton I saw only 5.67 KB. Im predict it Complete Version is less than 100 Kb. Doubt if NAGOA is in LLL.
Posted on 2003-11-24 05:11:36 by realvampire
chimaira,

I agree with donkey, although masm is more high level than nasm it doesn't prevent from writing low level code. The high level features are optional. It's the same thing with HLA. Many feel that because its a High Level Assembler is can't be used to write low level code :grin:. You want to learn assembly because you want to learn how everything works at the lowest level and I think you may have decided to use nasm because the tutorials on masm use its high level features. I understand that because it was the same way with me. After using low level control structures and understanding the code the high level control structures generate you might find that the high level control structures make your life much easier especially if you're programming windows. So I think you should try nasm and if you're happy with it you can stick with it but if you begin to feel like its holding you back you can check out masm and when masm is holding you back then you can give HLA a try :).
Posted on 2003-11-24 05:28:34 by Odyssey
i recommend RadAsm :tongue:
Posted on 2003-11-24 07:43:20 by bj1500
Hi chimaira,

I hope this clears up some things for you.

1. NASM, or Netwide Assembler, WAS in development. It has almost never been updated since long back. Although, an excellent attempt at making an assembler, other assemblers are certainly much better off than NASM now.

2. FASM, or flat assembler, is the one that is under most active development. Probably one of the best to program for both Windows and Linux.

3. HLA, or High Level Assembler, is the best assembler for learning asm. However, that doesn't mean you cannot use it for advanced work. It is highly competent and also holds a lot of potential for advanced coders. You'll surely get blown away by the superior syntax and capabilities, although don't get too accustomed to it.

4. MASM, or Microsoft Macro Assembler, is the most popular assembler around. It's the most advanced and allows you to do a hell lot more than you can imagine. Like any other tool, it too has it's limitations, but those won't bother beginners much. It's probably one the best for programming Windows-based applications.

5. GoAsm, Jeremy Gordon's assembler, is best for programming 32-bit Windows-based applications and has some really cool features.

6. TASM, Turbo Assembler, is unsupported. It's from Borland.

Not as a matter of personal preference, but I would suggest you to learn asm using HLA first and if you want you can start using MASM or FASM later. For Windows-only apps, you can use GoAsm.

Regards,
Art
Posted on 2003-11-24 09:02:56 by art_sands

3. HLA, or High Level Assembler, is the best assembler for learning asm. However, that doesn't mean you cannot use it for advanced work. It is highly competent and also holds a lot of potential for advanced coders. You'll surely get blown away by the superior syntax and capabilities, although don't get too accustomed to it.


I think aoa is one of the best texts for learning asm and it uses HLA but with the hla4masm/fasm/nasm(soon) packages that demonstrate how to call the HLA standard library functions I don't see why someone can't read aoa and use another assembler. Converting HLA code to masm would be easier than other assemblers though because of its high level features.



2. FASM, or flat assembler, is the one that is under most active development. Probably one of the best to program for both Windows and Linux.


One of my favorite assemblers :). I like that eventhough its pure assemler without built in high level features, the macro system is powerful enough to implement these features.



5. GoAsm, Jeremy Gordon's assembler, is best for programming 32-bit Windows-based applications and has some really cool features.


I've looked at GoAsm before, a long time ago. That was when it was still a shareware assembler. That turned me off from it. With all the free assemblers available today it was shocking to see one that was not free :grin:


4. MASM, or Microsoft Macro Assembler, is the most popular assembler around. It's the most advanced and allows you to do a hell lot more than you can imagine. Like any other tool, it too has it's limitations, but those won't bother beginners much. It's probably one the best for programming Windows-based applications.


Masm with the masm32 package and RadAsm makes it the best tool for windows programming in my opinion :)



6. TASM, Turbo Assembler, is unsupported. It's from Borland.


I've heard good things about Tasm. It's a waste of code that its no longer supported. Can't someone from borland take Tasm as a personal project and maintain it or can't someone buy the source code???


1. NASM, or Netwide Assembler, WAS in development. It has almost never been updated since long back. Although, an excellent attempt at making an assembler, other assemblers are certainly much better off than NASM now.

I agree :). No need for nasm when we have fasm :grin:. That is unless you need to code for exotic platforms :)
Posted on 2003-11-24 09:50:20 by Odyssey
I think aoa is one of the best texts for learning asm and it uses HLA but with the hla4masm/fasm/nasm(soon) packages that demonstrate how to call the HLA standard library functions I don't see why someone can't read aoa and use another assembler. Converting HLA code to masm would be easier than other assemblers though because of its high level features.
i tried reading it but i got tired after like 10 pages...i can't wait like 435394 pages for just getting my main app done, i dont want to spend like 2 years for reading it, i want to start doing now something and from then on look to other people code
Posted on 2003-11-24 10:33:47 by chimaira

i tried reading it but i got tired after like 10 pages...i can't wait like 435394 pages for just getting my main app done, i dont want to spend like 2 years for reading it, i want to start doing now something and from then on look to other people code


:grin:. I know how you feel. I've started reading it a long time ago and I am still not finished as yet. But I can assure you its worth reading. You wouldn't find another single text online with as much information as AOA.. But I know of another good tutorial thats shorter than aoa. Not as detailed but its good nevertheless. You might have heard about it before. It's dr paul carter's asm tutorial and it uses nasm. You can download it at http://www.drpaulcarter.com/pcasm/
Posted on 2003-11-24 10:54:48 by Odyssey



:grin:. I know how you feel. I've started reading it a long time ago and I am still not finished as yet. But I can assure you its worth reading. You wouldn't find another single text online with as much information as AOA.. But I know of another good tutorial thats shorter than aoa. Not as detailed but its good nevertheless. You might have heard about it before. It's dr paul carter's asm tutorial and it uses nasm. You can download it at http://www.drpaulcarter.com/pcasm/

hmm actually i started looking at it the other night as i saw it in a post by someone here (i think it was you because it was somebody with a blue avatar:rolleyes: ) but right now i dont remember how was the tuturial
Posted on 2003-11-24 10:58:19 by chimaira
Hi chimaira,

All of the assemblers have their own syntactical oddities but MASM has the most flexible syntax. That is probably what you are looking for, I would reccomend RadASM if you are going to use MASM though WinAsm and AsmEdit are also excellent IDEs.

GoAsm is the best non-MASM assembler out there without a doubt if you are looking for a solid assembler that stays close enough to MASM syntax without the high level stuff. GoAsm also provides the best unicode support and some excellent string handling features. For GoAsm the IDE is RadASM as well.

The others I do not use on a regular basis but FASM is the other "good" package for that RadASM is the most mature IDE and though Fresh looks promising and is coming up fast it is still in it's testing phase. HLA is a preprocessor that compiles your HLA code into an assembler program then assembles it using either MASM or FASM, again RadASM is the IDE of choice for that.

And let's not gloss over RoAsm, for all of the physcological and political problems of the author it is still a very nice assembler and it is completely integrated into an IDE. It is worth a look but be advised that the author can be a little vindictive if you should be so bold as to disagree with him.

So in the final analysis choose your assembler based on how comfortable you are with the syntax and use RadASM as your IDE.
Posted on 2003-11-24 10:58:30 by donkey


hmm actually i started looking at it the other night as i saw it in a post by someone here (i think it was you because it was somebody with a blue avatar:rolleyes: ) but right now i dont remember how was the tuturial
actually now i remember, i stoped in the part to test some code because i didnt have a NASM IDE! :grin:
Posted on 2003-11-24 11:06:46 by chimaira
yeah that's true with Betov (RosAsm's author). i've read some of his posts at the newsgroups, and i really find them a little arrogant. randy has been under constant irritation from him. urk! :rolleyes: i remember one post where hutch almost took him on with some cleverly written code. :grin:

Regards,
Art
Posted on 2003-11-24 11:28:51 by art_sands
There is also the Lazy Assembler which is compatible with TASM ideal mode:

http://lzasm.hotbox.ru
Posted on 2003-11-24 11:58:02 by Vortex

yeah that's true with Betov (RosAsm's author). i've read some of his posts at the newsgroups, and i really find them a little arrogant.


I find him amusing :grin:. alt.lang.asm is an entertaining forum. :grin:
Posted on 2003-11-24 13:21:17 by Odyssey
One of my favorite assemblers . I like that eventhough its pure assemler without built in high level features, the macro system is powerful enough to implement these features.

Yes! I fully agree with you! :alright: IMHO FASM is the best assembler out there! So plain, but though so powerful! For those who have not tested it yet, please do it! Explore the powerful Flat Assembler, its excellent macro system, its wonderful syntax and all the other features it offers you. ;) Newbies, choose FASM... :cool:

Hehe...maybe a bit much advertising, but I'm just telling you my fellings... ;)
Posted on 2003-11-24 13:37:52 by Tommy
BAH i dont get how however made the NASM tuturial is wanting us to have to cut and past like 60 lines of code and then after that have to delete the leading line marks omfg.......

edit: ok ok i found in the site a different zip with all the code :D
Posted on 2003-11-24 14:40:39 by chimaira