Re: [DotGNU]FASM vs ildasm

[BioChem333]

On Sat, 2002-10-26 at 23:41, hooh pxw wrote:
> hi! 
> i just want suggest using fasm for low level part of dotgnu portable net!
> MS's C# is frontend of .NET framework(core is ildasm), right?
> i think developer use too many tools for writing DotGNU system.
> and i guess only one tools need to make ildasm-like-thing.

I'm still trying to translate that. ??

> Dear Developer!
> currently, you are using linux, gcc, gcc-related tools(huge!).
> i don't think gcc/linux is Platform independent!(gcc on win32? partly works. 
> GUI/reactos?)

GNU/Linux _is_ a platform, so how can it be "platform independant"? GCC
is _the_ compiler for GNU/Posix systems and it runs fine on win32 with
cygwin.

> http://fasm.sf.net
> 
> fasm is self-assembling assembler. i.e.
> c:\>fasm fasm.asm -o fasm.exe
> 
> fasm is available for win32, linux, dos, menuetos(is written in 
> fasm!)(http://menuetos.org),.
> and it is GPLed.

x86 assembly is hardly portable. That link you provided is to an x86
assmbler project. I don't think you understand what ildasm/ilasm are.
ilasm outputs IL assemblies, which are NOT native binaries; they are
_portable_ executables and dynamic link libraries which are run by the
runtime. ildasm is the dis-assembler for IL binaries which outputs
plain-text human-readable IL. IL binaries are like java class files;
they're platform/processor agnostic.

> Ps: i guess you are negative, but i am just want saying, and i am end user... 
> bye, good coding!

Negative about what? Did I miss something here?


Rich