If you think i am advertising RosAsm "pretty a lot", you should enter this name into the Box, and count how many Topics you can point out, to help you making this "alot" a mark of a very personal form of humour.

Some might call such fact, as you suggesting a particular product in about 8 percent of this thread`s messages, to be an advertisement. Perhaps instead of 'advertisement' I should had used 'suggestion'? But frankly when an author of a product suggests it so eagerly to the public, it does sounds like an advertisement.

I am sorry if all previously said sounded offensive. It ain' t meant to be so.

It's just if you make such statements, it would be nice if you can also provide some more backup information in which potential users might be interested.

Now that I have looked at RosAsm more thoroughly, it does look like it has some interesting features. Although in general it's not my bowl of soup, but as f0dder said works for some, doesn't for others..

Posted on 2006-04-22 17:28:02 by arafel

Arafel, If you think i am advertising RosAsm "pretty a lot", you should enter this name into the Box, and count how many Topics you can point out, to help you making this "alot" a mark of a very personal form of humour.

I think Arafel was touching on the fact that you haven't posted here for years and all of a sudden you come here to respond to a single thread which seemingly advertises about RosASM.

I think he misses the fact that you used to help people here ;)
Posted on 2006-04-23 00:39:11 by SpooK
And for the Libraries topic, - even though there is no real reason to use this, instead of DLLs, under Win32, and particulary not, in the Open Source Mouvement -, there are actually two volunteers working on an integrated LibScanner Tool, that will, at the end, Disassemble the .Lib and .Obj Files, in order to recover their contents, with Symbols, and all.

Not sure if the approach is a good one for RosAsm to officially support, first off you're disassembling some-one elses code so you do not have the internal knowledge that comes from writing it yourself. With any disassembler there are always going to be misses, with your own code it is easy to spot and correct these, with someone elses it can be a long laborious task. As long as the code follows exactly the execution path expected by the disasm this approach would be fine, however, any miss by the disassembler could result in a hopeless undecypherable mess. The problem with libraries is that when you need them they have to work flawlessly and debugging somebody elses code that works fine with every other assembler out there is not something that the casual user will ever undertake, it is a job for advanced users and will do nothing at all to attract new users to RosAsm.

Ofcourse LIB files have interest to assembly programming, it gets the application done, that is the only requirement that counts in any language. zLib is a good example of a LIB file that is very useful however there are others, a good report writing library, a database connectivity library, communications library etc... All of these allow you to concentrate on the inner workings of your application and farm out the "donkey" work to specialized libraries. Without library support of some kind any language is little more than a curious toy not meant for prime time.

That said, I am happy that the RosAsm team has finally tackled this issue, it has been lagging behind all other assemblers for years because of it and it's nice to see it finally making the first steps toward a modern assembler.
Posted on 2006-04-23 07:59:42 by donkey
My own personal opinion ,
progs are

Masm its 'the standard' as far a sample source code goes..
Goasm has some powerful features masm lacks...

Softice for os level
Ollydbg for everything else -
It supports softice commandline arguments so you easy
flip between the two when os level debuging is req'ed.
Posted on 2006-05-23 16:04:56 by asmrixstar
I guess I am a month too late replying to this thread now, anyway if anybody else should be interested in another lightweight and pretty portable (DOS/Win16/Win32) assembler that includes a DOS extender as well as source level debugger, make sure to check out the freeware "Pass32" assembler: http://people.freenet.de/dieterp/main.htm
If you take a look at the homepage, you'll see that there's also a pretty good manual included: http://people.freenet.de/dieterp/pass32.pdf as well as links to a 32 bit DOS extender and console mode source debugger-the following is a screenshot of the debugger:

It's pretty cool stuff, I used it already more than 5 yrs ago, so it's also pretty solid!


Posted on 2006-05-26 16:46:37 by int80h
Wow, pass32 - been quite a while since I saw anybody mention that. Used it myself too, quite a while ago :)
Posted on 2006-05-26 16:58:41 by f0dder

Wow, pass32 - been quite a while since I saw anybody mention that. Used it myself too, quite a while ago :)

guess that goes to show how old we must be ;-)
Well, actually I used it quite a bit in the late nineties, I think it had quite some "secret" momentum at times ;-)
Things like nasm and all those other "open" assemblers weren't really that available or feasible back then for DOS/Win development.
So Pass32 was really quite an excellent option-also the open source movement wasn't THAT big then either, mostly you simply wanted to use an assembler for DOS and Win 3.11/Win95 development.

The fact that it isn't open source is the only drawback I'd see currently. I mentioned it only because the OP seemed to be looking for a 32 bit assembler that includes a source level debugger. So I remembered the good old Pass32 times :-) Also, it seemed there weren't that many options available that matched the OP's requirements.

And as a student I'd much rather use some closed source freeware tool, instead of anything I'd have to pay 50 bucks for. Also, Pass32 can be used for a whole variety of DOS/Win related development. So, it doesn't need any special Win32 version in order to work properly, in fact you can even run it under an DOS emulator such as bochs and use it under Linux or MacOS.

So, if my posting helps Pass32 to get its revival-why not? :-)

Posted on 2006-05-26 17:14:17 by int80h
I'm kind of getting in late on this but I'll put my  two cents in anyhow. I figure a university is also teaching C/C++, VC6++ allows in-line assembler, has a fair debugger, and its easy to wrap a C/C++ wrapper around your assembler 32 bit code. I do not know if your university holds the licences for VC++ but you may find you have what you need to accomplish your objectives.

Now, I'll stand back and see if I catch fire for all the flame that could follow from proposing such an idea!  :P
Posted on 2006-07-09 11:07:13 by Re_Boot