tniASM v0.41

The New Image released a new version of their cross-assembler for Z80, R800 and Gameboy, called tniASM. Version 0.41 is a small maintenance release, but very helpful for people wanting to use extended ASCII in their source files.

A completely rewritten tniASM is still in development, which will sport additional features, like very flexible and extensive macro support and universal CPU support.

Comments (25)

By Vincent van Dam

Hero (513)

17-09-2004, 22:12

It would be cool if there was a Linux version available

By anonymous

incognito ergo sum (116)

18-09-2004, 01:02

I got that request so often I can't get around it, can I ^^;
Hopefully next version will be released for both OS's

By karloch

Prophet (2159)

18-09-2004, 01:05

Meanwhile you can try to run it with WINE

By sjoerd

Hero (609)

18-09-2004, 05:38

It would be cool if there was a Linux version available
You mean to say SjASM is cool? Or at least the fact there is a Linux version is cool...
Hopefully next version will be released for both OS's
As if there are only two oses

Anyway, why not fix some bugs, or at least let people know there are some things to work around

By BiFi

Enlighted (4348)

18-09-2004, 08:26

Well, I haven't found any bugs in tniASM (yet), so I think there wouldn't be too many releases of it to fix any bugs... or even extend the instruction set.

By anonymous

incognito ergo sum (116)

18-09-2004, 13:14

What are you fishing for, sjoerd?

By sjoerd

Hero (609)

19-09-2004, 17:09

Well, I haven't found any bugs in tniASM (yet)So? Why do you feel the need to defend tniASM, anyway? Even the programmer of tniASM admits there are bugs...
so I think there wouldn't be too many releases of it to fix any bugs...Are you referring here to SjASM bug-fix releases? Most release were because of feature requests from users.
Now there is a new tniASM release that doesn't fix any of the 'bugs' I know of.
or even extend the instruction set.Pff, and why would that be a problem? Of course it would be better to use macro's for this, but who cares? And even your beloved tniASM does this kind of thing with push&pop.
What are you fishing for, sjoerd?Well, not for a fight or something, if you think that.
I think the fact that the linenumbers tniASM comes up with don't always are right is at least worth mentioning in the manual, if you can't fix it.
Also the if pseudo-op doesn't work like I would expect. I'm not saying this is a bug, but it's at least undocumented behaviour

You already know what I consider bugs in tniASM... So I guess I'm fishing for, I don't know, fixes or something?
Guess I shouldn't have pressed the OK-button after all

By anonymous

incognito ergo sum (116)

19-09-2004, 18:43

Aside from the fact that it's quite pathetic to come here to advertise SjASM, you're making a few unfounded accusations and putting words in my mouth.

Grow up.

By sjoerd

Hero (609)

19-09-2004, 21:46

Aside from the fact that it's quite pathetic to come here to advertise SjASMIt wasn't the intention to advertise SjASM. I thought it was strange that there was a new update, but that the bugs, or whatever you call them, were still there. My reactions to the Linux version were just, uhm, me being drunk, I guess. Anyway, like I said, I shouldn't have posted that reaction, every reaction of me to a tniASM topic will be seen as me advertising for SjASM. (Please, all go buy SjASM!)
you're making a few unfounded accusationsThe 'accusations' are not unfounded. Look, if you don't care tniASM has bugs, fine with me. But don't be so pathetic to pretend they're not there.
and putting words in my mouth.Only things you have said before.
Grow up.Like you did?

I know, I shouldn't have bothered to react... This gets us nowhere, and we've been there before It won't happen again.

By anonymous

incognito ergo sum (116)

19-09-2004, 22:33

Moderators, please take care of this clown.
It's clear Sjoerd is looking for a fight with his lies and accusations.

By flyguille

Prophet (3031)

20-09-2004, 01:57

First, this release were made because when i do some examples of code for MNBIOS programming, i found that using accents the tniASM fail, why? because before was not thought to support 8 bit ASCII char set. And only by my request GuyveR released this version...

now, i know that tniASM not support macro´s , but i not found any bug ...

By flyguille

Prophet (3031)

20-09-2004, 02:10

and other thing....i'm not in the side of nobody .....

is just that i use tniASM, nothing more, i not have tested SjASM and because that i can't talk about a comparative test...

as i see you are very active with your compiler, i can compare it with my activity level doing MNBIOS.... each month i see a new release of SjASM in MRC, so i thinks that you are making a great job and dedicate a lot of time as me in our loved platform. So continue in that way.... and i apresiate a lot to guys like you, snout, ic, and all guys that dedicate to msx a lot of time....

but is no sense to mentioning about SjASM in a reaction list of tniASM, so, i will ask you that you define more your limits... in way to know if a post or reply will bother or not...

Surely , if i follow your behavior of today surely i will post all about MNBIOS or atleast a little mention of it in each thread ..... that is seen bad... you can see that normaly i not do that almost if the thread is not about asking by a os, or the typical "i'm new here, what you recommend".

and thinks what will happens if in your next release, guyver reply with "ohhh, you fix that bug... and what about the others" (without specific what bugs).

that is anonnying for any developer.... offcourse also the bad critics... but, this is not that case.

so, be nice, and enjoy the community

Flyguille

By Vincent van Dam

Hero (513)

20-09-2004, 09:19

I was wondering about the 8-bit ASCII implementation; readings Flyguile's post I assume you mapped Microsofts' codepage 1252 characters (especially the accents) to regular characters?

By anonymous

incognito ergo sum (116)

20-09-2004, 13:00

Eh? Mapping wouldn't work, because the codepage is different under MS-DOS, Windows, and MSX. Basically what happened is I removed a AND 7Fh.

As for 'bugs'... I don't know what sjoerd means with that IF-thingy.
But tniASM has an issue where the linenumber reported in an error is sometimes 1 higher than the actual line number. So what? Even commercial compilers (e.g. Visual Studio) and GCC have issues with linenumbers in errors.

I could fix it, but it's not critical at all, and everyone knows (or should know) a new version is coming up with a completely rewritten codebase. It doesn't have this issue, so why should I spend energy on fixing it in the old codebase, when I could spend the energy on finishing the new one?

Sjoerd is just trolling...

By Vincent van Dam

Hero (513)

20-09-2004, 15:09

Basically what happened is I removed a AND 7Fh.

Ah, now I understand

By sjoerd

Hero (609)

21-09-2004, 19:14

so, if you has the knowledge of any bug please comment here exactly what is it... and which is the procedure that triggered it.... if not, just stop of fishing that in this way you are damaging your image yourself.....I don't think it's possible to do any more damage to my image, having previous 'discussions' with GuyveR800 in mind.

In one of those discussions (in a reaction to a SjASM news post) I stated some issues I found. Of course I can back up any 'accusation' I made there. None of these make tniASM unworkable, I admit. On the other hand, it shouldn't be too hard to fix them, or at least mention them in the manual. Especcially in the light of GuyveR800's reactions towards SjASM...

The problem I found with the IF directive:

  if 0
label:
  else
label:
  endif

but is no sense to mentioning about SjASM in a reaction list of tniASM, so, i will ask you that you define more your limits... in way to know if a post or reply will bother or not...You're right.
and thinks what will happens if in your next release, guyver reply with "ohhh, you fix that bug... and what about the others" (without specific what bugs).We know what will happen then In my defence: I mentioned the 'bugs' (forward referencing, ld a,(1)+1, linenumbering) before, so I thought GuyveR800 would remember them too.
so, be nice, and enjoy the communityThanks Flyguille! You too.
Basically what happened is I removed a AND 7Fh.And that increases the executable size from 272KB to 477KB? (Is this trolling?)

By flyguille

Prophet (3031)

22-09-2004, 02:21

And that increases the executable size from 272KB to 477KB? (Is this trolling?)

yeah, i too notices that

By anonymous

incognito ergo sum (116)

22-09-2004, 13:41

flyguille, the file size increase is due to optimizations. Also, the executable is not compressed. If you compress it with UPX, the EXE size should be ~40K.

A non-optimized version would weigh in at 21K, so if that's your preference, maybe next version will be non-optimized. (It doesn't make much of a difference on any PC released in the last year anyway.)

By DanySoft

Champion (452)