From: terje.mathisen@nospicedham.tmsw.no   
      
   Ned Latham wrote:   
   > Frank Kotler wrote:   
   >> Melzzzzz wrote:   
   >   
   >>>> You have plenty of assemblers nowadays which are better then masm.   
   >>>> I use nasm and fasm.   
   >>>   
   >>> What's besser than MASM ?   
   >>   
   >> :) :) :)   
   >>   
   >> As moderator, I really should point out that "My assembler is better   
   >> than your assembler" is really not on topic here... (differences are okay)   
   >   
   > Or comments on quality?   
   >   
   > Back in 1994 a year 2 assigment was to write an automaton in assembler.   
   > They gave us three weeks and MASM, EDIT (or was it EDLIN?) and some M$   
   > system calls to work with. The editor and the asembler were pathetic.   
   >   
   > I mean they were both *really* bad. And the system calls were slo-o-o-w.   
   >   
   > So after nine days of struggling with those grossly inadequate tools   
   > I spat the dummy. Got onto usenet looking for some help. Found PC-Write   
   > and a86. Also did a bit of checking on the IBM PC BIOS.   
   >   
   > Rewrote the assigment using those tools and info. Finished ahead of   
   > time and got 110/100 for it.   
   >   
   > What's better than MASM? a86. Streets ahead.   
   >   
   My personal favorite was tasm, the assmbler shipped alongside Borland's   
   Turbo languages.   
      
   It could run in masm-compatible modus, then they added a few   
   nice-to-have extensions.   
      
   Terje   
      
   Terje   
      
   --   
   -    
   "almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)