Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 18:09:41 +0200 From: Marius Bendiksen <Marius.Bendiksen@scancall.no> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, David Holland <dholland@cs.toronto.edu> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Producing non-GPLed tools for FreeBSD Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19981020180941.009625b0@mail.scancall.no> In-Reply-To: <4.1.19981020091349.06ac29d0@mail.lariat.org> References: <3.0.5.32.19981020162222.0091a640@mail.scancall.no> <4.1.19981019150118.06775920@mail.lariat.org> <98Oct19.164437edt.37814-9002@qew.cs.toronto.edu> <4.1.19981019000937.06571220@mail.lariat.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> [license] Oh. So much for that idea. You could probably try talking to the author, though; I think he'd be willing to issue a berkeley-licensed version. >Parsing assembly language is pretty easy. The trickiest part of the "normal" >syntax is that the validity (or non-validity) and semantics of a statement >may depend on context. For instance, "assume" directives can change the >semantics of statements that follow them. The assembler has to be worried >about segmentation, and must search for the segment register through >which it can "reach" a symbol. It gets tricky. That's why Borland invented >its "ideal" Intel assembly language syntax. Actually, that's where I like NASM. To quote the docs: NASM doesn't ASSUME. It's pretty clean-cut as far as everything is concerned.. --- Marius Bendiksen, IT-Trainee, ScanCall AS <marius@scancall.no> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.5.32.19981020180941.009625b0>