DOS ain't dead - TASM support in WASM

Berlin, Germany,
25.05.2009, 22:38

TASM support in WASM (Developers)

Quoting Jiri Malak:

I integrated Berth-Olof Bergman TASM support (including IDEAL mode) into
WASM development branch.
I would like to ask anybody who is interested in TASM stuff to test new WASM
version.
For TASM mode you must use -zcm=tasm command line option.
Binaries are available for download here
http://owbuilder.malakovi.cz/download/wasm.zip
Source code is in perforce WASM development branch.
Please report bug into OW contributors newsgroup.

Jiri

---
Forum admin

Japheth

Germany (South),
28.05.2009, 08:09

@ rr

limited TASM support in WASM

Post reply

> Please report bug into OW contributors newsgroup.

It should be mentioned that the TASM support is limited. Many TASM sources probably won't assemble without errors.

So WASM is now partially Masm v5, partially Masm v6 and partially Tasm (IDEAL) compatible, and additionally has some features which are unique.

Big problem: it isn't documented which Masm/Tasm feature is implemented and which isn't. Even more, Wasm often silently accepts a syntax which it doesn't really understand, so you can't be sure that everything is fine when your source was compiled without errors.

---
MS-DOS forever!

Rugxulo

Usono,
28.05.2009, 22:01

@ Japheth

limited TASM support in WASM

Post reply

> > Please report bug into OW contributors newsgroup.
>
> It should be mentioned that the TASM support is limited. Many TASM sources
> probably won't assemble without errors.
>
> So WASM is now partially Masm v5, partially Masm v6 and partially Tasm
> (IDEAL) compatible, and additionally has some features which are unique.

True, and it's much better than nothing!

> Big problem: it isn't documented which Masm/Tasm feature is implemented
> and which isn't. Even more, Wasm often silently accepts a syntax which it
> doesn't really understand, so you can't be sure that everything is fine
> when your source was compiled without errors.

That's nothing, I was messing with SolarASM yesterday, and I was scratching my head for an hour trying to figure out why it assembled my file without errors but produced 0-byte output!! And when I finally overcame that, turns out it didn't even support the instructions I wanted (alas). :-P