Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Back to the board
Thread view  Mix view  Order
cm(R)

Homepage E-mail

Düsseldorf, Germany,
19.09.2010, 13:01
 

NASM versions 2.09.01, 2.09.02 available (Announce)

The NASM developers have released NASM versions 2.09.01 and 2.09.02.

Home page: http://www.nasm.us/
Download: http://www.nasm.us/pub/nasm/releasebuilds/2.09.02/

Changes in 2.09.02, 2010-09-17:
? Fix reversed tokens when %deftok produces more than one output token. (*)
? Fix segmentation fault on disassembling some VEX instructions.
? Missing %endif did not always cause error. (*)
? Fix typo in documentation.
? Compound context local preprocessor single line macro identifiers were not expanded early enough and as result lead to unresolved symbols.

Changes in 2.09.01, 2010-09-07:
? Fix NULL dereference on missed %deftok second parameter. (*)
? Fix NULL dereference on invalid %substr parameters.

(*) Bug reported by me.

---
l

Japheth(R)

Homepage

Germany (South),
19.09.2010, 18:45

@ cm

NASM versions 2.09.01, 2.09.02 available

> ? Compound context local preprocessor single line macro identifiers were
> not expanded early enough and as result lead to unresolved symbols.

"Compound context local preprocessor single line macro identifiers"

Could you clarify what this is in German? Perhaps

"zusammengesetzte, kontextlokale Präprozessoreinzelzeilenmakroidentifizierer"

---
MS-DOS forever!

cm(R)

Homepage E-mail

Düsseldorf, Germany,
19.09.2010, 19:04

@ Japheth

NASM versions 2.09.01, 2.09.02 available

> Perhaps
>
> "zusammengesetzte, kontextlokale
> Präprozessoreinzelzeilenmakroidentifizierer"

Pretty much. It makes sense in context. See this commit. The last test case shows one such compound identifier:

%assign %$_ur%$_uses %$_uses

Note that the identifier for the single-line macro given to %assign (as first parameter) is made of several parts. I think the bug was caused by preprocessor changes that would make this fail with an embedded context-local smacro in the identifier. For example:

%assign foo%$bar 38

This would not do what was expected of it because the context-local smacro %$bar would not be expanded, or so. I don't know the specifics.

---
l

Rugxulo(R)

Homepage

Usono,
19.09.2010, 20:25

@ Japheth

NASM versions 2.09.01, 2.09.02 available

> > ? Compound context local preprocessor single line macro identifiers were
> > not expanded early enough and as result lead to unresolved symbols.
>
> "Compound context local preprocessor single line macro identifiers"
>
> Could you clarify what this is in German? Perhaps
>
> "zusammengesetzte, kontextlokale
> Präprozessoreinzelzeilenmakroidentifizierer"

gesundheit! :rotfl:

cm(R)

Homepage E-mail

Düsseldorf, Germany,
19.09.2010, 20:32

@ Rugxulo

NASM versions 2.09.01, 2.09.02 available

> > "zusammengesetzte, kontextlokale
> > Präprozessoreinzelzeilenmakroidentifizierer"
>
> gesundheit! :rotfl:

You probably don't even know how it's pronounced :-P

Rugxulo(R)

Homepage

Usono,
20.09.2010, 04:22

@ cm

NASM versions 2.09.01, 2.09.02 available

> > > "zusammengesetzte, kontextlokale
> > > Präprozessoreinzelzeilenmakroidentifizierer"
> >
> > gesundheit! :rotfl:
>
> You probably don't even know how it's pronounced :-P

You're right. I am a jelly donut.

marcov(R)

22.09.2010, 13:46

@ cm

NASM versions 2.09.01, 2.09.02 available

> > > "zusammengesetzte, kontextlokale
> > > Präprozessoreinzelzeilenmakroidentifizierer"
> >
> > gesundheit! :rotfl:
>
> You probably don't even know how it's pronounced :-P

I assume like "gezondheid" but then with a "u"

cm(R)

Homepage E-mail

Düsseldorf, Germany,
22.09.2010, 14:26

@ marcov

NASM versions 2.09.01, 2.09.02 available

> > > > "zusammengesetzte, kontextlokale
> > > > Präprozessoreinzelzeilenmakroidentifizierer"
> > >
> > > gesundheit! :rotfl:
> >
> > You probably don't even know how it's pronounced :-P
>
> I assume like "gezondheid" but then with a "u"

Kinda.. see here. You can listen to the actual (german) and alleged american pronunciation by clicking the icons next to the words. (That's better than communicating it through text because I don't know how you would pronounce f.e. "gezondheid".)

I actually meant the zusammengesetzten kontext-lokalen Präprozessor-Einzel-Zeilen-Makro-Identifizierer though. Now just imagine that faster and more fluent.

---
l

Rugxulo(R)

Homepage

Usono,
22.09.2010, 22:30

@ cm

NASM versions 2.09.01, 2.09.02 available

> Kinda.. see here.
> You can listen to the actual (german) and alleged american pronunciation by
> clicking the icons next to the words.

Both sound the exact same to me, same as is commonly pronounced here (U.S.). Yeah, reading German prose sounds like a blast (not). ;-)

cm(R)

Homepage E-mail

Düsseldorf, Germany,
22.09.2010, 22:35

@ Rugxulo

NASM versions 2.09.01, 2.09.02 available

> Both sound the exact same to me, same as is commonly pronounced here
> (U.S.).

Funny, the given american pronunciation sounds a little off for me. But maybe that's just me.

---
l

marcov(R)

23.09.2010, 10:01

@ cm

NASM versions 2.09.01, 2.09.02 available

> > > You probably don't even know how it's pronounced :-P
> >
> > I assume like "gezondheid" but then with a "u"
>
> Kinda.. see here.

I understand _some_ German :-)

> You can listen to the actual (german) and alleged american pronunciation by
> clicking the icons next to the words. (That's better than communicating it
> through text because I don't know how you would pronounce f.e.
> "gezondheid".)

Keep the o short, and pronounce it like you read it. Avoid changing the "z" to effectively more of a "tz", or the d to a t. (much like "d"'s at the end of words in English) Dutch is pretty much more relaxed German.

> I actually meant the

Sounds better if you use Vorbearbeiter (Voruebersetzer?) or so instead of preprocessor IMHO

cm(R)

Homepage E-mail

Düsseldorf, Germany,
23.09.2010, 15:01

@ marcov

NASM versions 2.09.01, 2.09.02 available

> Sounds better if you use Vorbearbeiter (Voruebersetzer?) or so instead of
> preprocessor IMHO

Yeah but no one says that when they mean a compiler's preprocessor. A lot of computer tech terms are just used verbatim in german, so even just adapting the spelling from "Preprocessor" to "Präprozessor" is something. (I don't really care though. Programmers should use english if they use english programming languages. I.e. almost always.)

I'd rather go with "Vorübersetzer" though, that conveys the meaning better. ("Bearbeiter" (processor, editor) might describe the preprocessor better, but "Vorbearbeiter" doesn't convey that it runs before a compiler - as opposed to another "Bearbeiter".) "Compiler" also translates either as "Kompilierer" or "Übersetzer", where the latter fits with "Vorübersetzer".

---
l

Back to the board
Thread view  Mix view  Order
15112 Postings in 1359 Threads, 247 registered users, 13 users online (0 registered, 13 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum