Re: A83: TAZM...(not so very ***VITAL*** if you ask me)
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A83: TAZM...(not so very ***VITAL*** if you ask me)
>From: "Thomas J. Hruska" <shinelight@detroit.crosswinds.net>
>Reply-To: assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org
>To: assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org
>Subject: Re: A83: TAZM...(not so very ***VITAL*** if you ask me)
>Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 21:47:55 -0400
>
>
>At 07:03 PM 6/1/99 +0200, you wrote:
> >On 01-Jun-99, you wrote:
> >
> >> 2) Cleaner, shorter code (a bit obvious from the above example, no?)
> >> a) Simplified multiple address references (previous example).
> >> b) Register math!!! I can't count how many times I've just wanted to
>type:
> >> ld a, (a+b+c) << 2 (in IDEAL mode) and had to type:
> >> ld a,a \ add a,b \ add a,c \ add a,a instead.
> >
> >And forget what asm is all about? Nah!! Asm is supposed to be a mnemonic
>way
> >of expressing the actual hardware instructions given to the processor,
>not
> >some kind of foolin' around in Basic. The whole point of enjoying asm is
>that
> >you get to understand what actually happens inside that mysterious
>silicon
> >clod.
>
>IDEAL mode __IS__ ASM. I, for one, find the x86 IDEAL mode quite easy to
>use. Whatever you are thinking, there is zero Basic code there. If
>anything, it looks more like C code...except it uses registers. If THAT is
>your complaint, you need not be worried since register math is
>optional...as well as IDEAL mode. The only thing that has to be converted
>are paranthesis referring to addresses.
>
>If you are concerned that you will have to change the way you write code,
>there is hardly any need to worry about that. IDEAL mode is only an
>extension to source that allows simplified programming. You are mistaking
>this to be simplified "Basic" programming that uses ASM as an extension.
>If you don't want to use IDEAL mode, that's okay. I'm only presenting it
>as an option to all programmers. You will still get to "understand what
>actually happens inside that mysterious silicon clod." You may say this is
>"not so vital," but it really is vital for the future of Z80 programming.
>
>As a side note, when IDEAL mode was first created for x86 processors,
>people had similar concerns but they addressed the issues just as I
>have...and IDEAL mode stuck. I have so far had several complaints, but
>from serious x86 programmers, I have had great support. I'm still waiting
>for everyone to debate a bit on the subject before making the final specs.
>on TAZM. IDEAL mode has so many positives to it, I really believe that it
>can only help the TI community.
>
>Shining Light Productions motto has always been "Meeting the Needs of
>Fellow Programmers" and will continue to do so. If the TI community
>doesn't want IDEAL mode, then it will be so. If they want it, then it will
>be so. Shining Light Productions is flexible and thus I want you to give
>IDEAL mode a chance. You have only been given a glimpse as to the power of
>IDEAL mode, so I propose that we (as a TI community) all try it out, and if
>we don't like it, then IDEAL mode will be no more. If we like it, IDEAL
>mode will stay. It's as simple as that.
>
>
> Thomas J. Hruska -- shinelight@detroit.crosswinds.net
>Shining Light Productions -- "Meeting the needs of fellow programmers"
> http://www.shininglightpro.com/
>
G'day Thomas, it's James (remember me?). I haven't read all the stuff on
this TAZM compiler, but although I haven't been programming in ASM for as
long as most of the people on this list, I tend to agree that ASM is the
understanding of the processor in the calc (to a certain extent). This TAZM
sounds like an all right idea, but I'll stick to TASM thanx.
James Vernon
jimbob_v@hotmail.com
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com