Re: a compembler for x86 that looks nearly portable

"R. L. Watkins" <RLWatkins@CompuServe.Com>
13 Jan 2002 22:52:39 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
a compembler for x86 that looks nearly portable rickh@capaccess.org (2002-01-07)
Re: a compembler for x86 that looks nearly portable RLWatkins@CompuServe.Com (R. L. Watkins) (2002-01-13)
Re: a compembler for x86 that looks nearly portable rickh@capaccess.org (2002-01-17)
Re: a compembler for x86 that looks nearly portable RLWatkins@CompuServe.Com (R. L. Watkins) (2002-01-24)
Re: a compembler for x86 that looks nearly portable rickh@capaccess.org (2002-01-28)
Re: a compembler for x86 that looks nearly portable rickh@capaccess.org (2002-01-28)
Re: a compembler for x86 that looks nearly portable david.thompson1@worldnet.att.net (David Thompson) (2002-02-06)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "R. L. Watkins" <RLWatkins@CompuServe.Com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 13 Jan 2002 22:52:39 -0500
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 02-01-038
Keywords: 386, assembler
Posted-Date: 13 Jan 2002 22:52:39 EST

1) Interesting. Sounds a bit like 'B' w/ built-in system calls.


2) This point is too important to be left buried at the end of a long post.
Everyone, in particular my own colleagues, repeat this to yourself until it
sinks in.


R. L. Watkins


> osimplay, formerly shasm, is an x86 macro-assembler, "mid-level-language",
or "compembler". It is implemented entirely in GNU Bash 2 without dependance
on any external utils.


> <snip>


> Bad names don't matter to machines, but frequently cause humans to write
dysfunctional, often totally self-extraneous code, and this effect is
self-compounding, and I believe people don't appreciate how bad the
situation is.


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.