← Back to context Comment by ryanianian 1 year ago Why is it "abusing," and what would you suggest as an alternative? 4 comments ryanianian Reply sylware 1 year ago Have a look an their code, it is obvious. Often you have to figure out what actually the macros does, and I remember it was not that straight forward.And the macro language is specific to nasm.What to do: unroll the macros and/or use a little abstraction using a simple common macro preprocessor, aka not tied to the assembler.And I am just doing exactly that: my x86_64 assembly code does assemble with fasm/nasm/gas with a little abstraction using a C preprocessor. PhilipRoman 1 year ago To be fair, nasm allows you to detach the preprocessor from the assembler (-E). But I agree with you in general. pengaru 1 year ago there is nothing wrong with depending on nasm sylware 1 year ago Yes, it is since you can with a little C preprocessor abstraction assemble with fasm/gas/nasm.
sylware 1 year ago Have a look an their code, it is obvious. Often you have to figure out what actually the macros does, and I remember it was not that straight forward.And the macro language is specific to nasm.What to do: unroll the macros and/or use a little abstraction using a simple common macro preprocessor, aka not tied to the assembler.And I am just doing exactly that: my x86_64 assembly code does assemble with fasm/nasm/gas with a little abstraction using a C preprocessor. PhilipRoman 1 year ago To be fair, nasm allows you to detach the preprocessor from the assembler (-E). But I agree with you in general. pengaru 1 year ago there is nothing wrong with depending on nasm sylware 1 year ago Yes, it is since you can with a little C preprocessor abstraction assemble with fasm/gas/nasm.
PhilipRoman 1 year ago To be fair, nasm allows you to detach the preprocessor from the assembler (-E). But I agree with you in general.
pengaru 1 year ago there is nothing wrong with depending on nasm sylware 1 year ago Yes, it is since you can with a little C preprocessor abstraction assemble with fasm/gas/nasm.
sylware 1 year ago Yes, it is since you can with a little C preprocessor abstraction assemble with fasm/gas/nasm.
Have a look an their code, it is obvious. Often you have to figure out what actually the macros does, and I remember it was not that straight forward.
And the macro language is specific to nasm.
What to do: unroll the macros and/or use a little abstraction using a simple common macro preprocessor, aka not tied to the assembler.
And I am just doing exactly that: my x86_64 assembly code does assemble with fasm/nasm/gas with a little abstraction using a C preprocessor.
To be fair, nasm allows you to detach the preprocessor from the assembler (-E). But I agree with you in general.
there is nothing wrong with depending on nasm
Yes, it is since you can with a little C preprocessor abstraction assemble with fasm/gas/nasm.