From: notsaying@nospicedham.invalid.org   
      
   On Sun, 05 Apr 2020 17:15:45 GMT, Ned Latham   
    wrote:   
      
   > R.Wieser wrote:   
   >> Ned,   
   >   
   >> > > My personal favorite was tasm, the assmbler shipped alongside   
   >> > > Borland's Turbo languages.   
   >> >   
   >> > Mmm. Borland were good. I had Turbo Pascal on my CP/M machine.   
   >>   
   >> Don't be too sure of that.   
   >>   
   >> I still have-and-use Tasm32 v5.x , and over time have found a number   
   >> of bugs in it. Some that did not seem to have any adverse effects,   
   >> one which made it forget the remainder of the line, some which caused   
   >> garbage to be generated, and others that just crashed either the   
   >> assembler or linker. It also cannot load a register with a constant   
   >> float or define wide strings ("db" for ASCII, nothing for wide   
   strings).   
   >>   
   >> IOW, its "good enough" (as long as you stay aware of its quirks), but   
   >> certainly not "good".   
   >   
   > Well, my experience of Borland *is* limited to Turbo Pascal for CP/M.   
   > There was no assembler with it. (But CP/M had some pretty good ones.)   
   >   
   > As far as x86 assemblers go, I've only ever used MASM and a86.   
   > MASM bad, a86 good; so good that I never looked beyond it.   
   >   
   >   
      
   I never got into a86's quirks compared to masm back when I was learning   
   x86; but going from masm to nasm just seemed nice, as nasm is less   
   verbose hovever I dislike that one has to translate code from masm to   
   nasm; especially if there are lots of addr[ix] --> [addr+ix] and changing   
   dR 0 dup n to resR n (and then nasm complains that it's not initialised!)   
      
      
      
   --   
   Bah, and indeed, Humbug.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)