Hi all

RadASM 2.0.4.1 is uploaded to my website.

Whats new:

2.0.4.1
- More flexible block collapse / expand. Optional named ending ($ endp --> ? endp).
- Better tasm support.
- Made changes to how auto brackets works.
- Fixed a very bad memory leak.

KetilO
Posted on 2004-02-23 06:03:25 by KetilO
hi,

Is it possible that one day you will use NSIS installer ?

bye
X05
Posted on 2004-02-23 06:48:58 by X05
...but if you ever start using an installer please keep the ZIP version for people who disslike installers :alright:
Posted on 2004-02-23 08:35:59 by Milos
Thank you Ketilo

It is already working better with TASM :alright:
Posted on 2004-02-23 17:43:58 by BogdanOntanu
but still :grin:


part_table PART_STRU 16 dup (<?>)


Is still NOT recognized / does not appear in the Properties list under this new version..

ie PART_STRU is recognized but part_code variable/array based on it is NOT

and adding: $ dup(<?>)

to tasm.ini is not helping anymore
Posted on 2004-02-24 07:42:31 by BogdanOntanu
Also,

Sometimes i happen to code for SolOS ie is another OS than Windows ...

And i have some structures and constants that have (by mistake) the same name as some in the API files.

Is there a way to specify (per project) that i do not want RadASM to search the structures into the API files for Windows OS and either use my own API/STRUCTURES/CONSTANTS or just restrain the search to what is already defined in the project files?

Another solution would be to search my project first and only if not found to search inside the API...

Now i get an wrong code completion for my own structure DIR_LIST :grin:
Posted on 2004-02-24 08:04:20 by BogdanOntanu
Hi Bogdan

dup (<?> ) not equal to dup(<?> )

KetilO
Posted on 2004-02-24 08:05:18 by KetilO
What about creating a new assembler and assembler ini, solos and solos.ini
Posted on 2004-02-24 08:09:42 by KetilO
Thank you Ketilo

I was so dumb that i was unable to see this simple solution to my above problems

a new one now :grin:

On a build error i get:


Make error(s) occured.
ERROR On Build: Version Number Was Not Increased.


Under my own OS there is NO resource file so what version number was not increased?

I am interested if that number is somewhere inside a file so i can use it as my release /build number for SolOS

And i really need that post build xcopy commands ;) this way i could avoid running external build bat files just to also do a copy
Posted on 2004-02-24 09:15:36 by BogdanOntanu
Hi Bogdan

Have a look at the Version Control addin. Maybe it solves both your problems.

KetilO
Posted on 2004-02-24 13:18:00 by KetilO
1)My SOL OS defined functions always have a STDCALL after them:



Str_Copy PROC STDCALL
...
ENDP


When code auto completion pops in it will NOT include the STDCALL keyword inline
and for SOL OS it is required or elese i will get an error ar compile time

AFAIK for win32 projects it is NOT required but for my OS special SEGEMNTS/MODEL definitions it is.

2) In TASM [] are favorised and when i type i am used to type [ automatically without thinking with any memory reference :grin: however sometimes RadASM insists to add another [ like when i terminate a ] manually. IMHO it should know that there is an "[" there already and do NOT add another (generating an error or forcing me to delete it...)

Esp. since [] double indirections are NOT alowed in Intel ASM.

3)With Some structures when i place my mouse over them i get very strange/error info in the info window:
see attached image below:
Posted on 2004-02-26 05:10:52 by BogdanOntanu
Hi Bogdan

1. Would not prototyping solve that problem?
2. You will get used to it / turn off auto brackets.
3. In ini file replace:

Struct=$ ends,$ struct,$ struc

with

Struct=ends,$ struct,$ struc

KetilO
Posted on 2004-02-26 06:39:14 by KetilO
BogdanOntanu,

how can u code with such colors,
i would go insane =)
Posted on 2004-02-26 07:42:59 by wizzra
Ketilo:

1) Nope i do not think PROTO will solve it, besides i do NOT have to PROTO in TASM and i usually do not. In my OS this is a limitation of TASM/segmets definition i use.

Besides i wonder: why are proto needed after all since assemblers pass twice on top of code and could easily deduct the arguments from the mere function definition :grin:

2)Ok, i will.

3)Thank you for reminding this to me again, i must havelost it when i installed the new version


To Wizzra:

:tongue: I do not like staring at a light bulb (white monitor) so i prefer black backgrounds and nice colors for the rest...
obviously: you!=me,so i guess i would not go insane if forced to use a white/light background... instead it will slowly kill my eyes....
Posted on 2004-02-26 11:13:42 by BogdanOntanu