JWASM Vs MASM

[Farabi]

Unfortunately MASM is 3 times faster than JWASM, that was because JWASM recheck the code twice where MASM did not. For example, if you create a function without any proto, JWASM will make our function passed and did not assume itu was an error, but MASM were not, but it make MASM faster than JWASM. I hope Japhet could do something for it.

[jj2007]

How did you time that? Can you post the code you are using for timing the assembly times? Can you post an example source that gets assembled three times faster by Masm (which version, by the way)?

[Farabi]

How did you time that? Can you post the code you are using for timing the assembly times? Can you post an example source that gets assembled three times faster by Masm (which version, by the way)?

Im compiling this http://www.masm32.com/board/index.php?topic=18137.new#new That was my game engine. When it comes to a big code, the timing differences is big.

[carlos]

This raises a interesting question that had been naggin me for several years. A Faster compiler creates Better:faster code?

In the end, the quality of the code is what matters, not the speed of the compiler

[Farabi]

This raises a interesting question that had been naggin me for several years. A Faster compiler creates Better:faster code?

In the end, the quality of the code is what matters, not the speed of the compiler

Well, you need to recheck the code each time for debugging right? Can you imagine if it was as slow as C++ when compiling a project could took 2 minutes?

[SteveAsm]

In the end, the quality of the code is what matters, not the speed of the compiler

Well, you need to recheck the code each time for debugging right?
Can you imagine if it was as slow as C++ when compiling a project could took 2 minutes?

Unforunately (for the asm community) there are more C/C++ programmers than there are asm programmers.
We just live with it.
I must concur with Carlos, the resulting program is what matters.
When compiling/assembling, I don't care if one tool is one or two thousands-of-a-second faster than the other, or even one or two seconds faster.
Does it generate glitch free executables ?

When compileing a long program, I ask myself: "could I use another cup of coffee" or "do I need to pee ?"

[hutch--]

 :bg

It must be relative, I remember the advice when building IRC bots via telnet to a server overseas over 10 years ago, "go have a pizza". On a decent server it was not all that bad and you could usually get the result after a cigarette or two.

Code quality was always the action.

[SteveAsm]

Many years ago, I worked for a guy who started out on mainframes.
He was telling me how all the programmers worked at night, because that was the only time there were enough resources available so they could compile programs.
And it took all night to compile a program.
They'd load the program up and start the compile process and wait an hour, or so, for the error report so the could start hunting for bugs.
Then start all over again.

So, waiting a second or two is a irrelevant.

[dedndave]

with hollerith cards, it might take all night just to read it in - lol
especially if one has a folded corner or something

[SteveAsm]

Do not fold, spindle or mutilate

[dedndave]

NOW he tells me   :P

[hutch--]

The end of punch cards was a great loss to modern computing, we lost all the virtues of nicely dressed pretty girls operating punch card machines and ended up with a pile of geeks instead.

[dedndave]

lol
oh i dunno
there are a few cute nerd girls out there
certainly not enough to go around, though

can't say that i ever had a pretty girl do my punch cards
i always had to mangle them by myself   :'(
i think as many went into the round file as into my shoebox

[dedndave]

i had better clarify to stay out of the doghouse
Z is cute - just not exactly a nerd girl
she is as square as they come, though   :P

[hutch--]

Yeah, we would hate to see you having to share accommodation with PHIDO  :P