Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!

Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!

  • Congratulations Mike Lewis on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Assembly SUB Tool

Status
Not open for further replies.

CubeE101

Programmer
Nov 19, 2002
1,492
0
0
US
For those who are not aware...
You CAN use assembly code inline within a QBasic program...
The catch is that it has to be pre assembled and executed with the CALL ABSOLUTE command...

This process is usually done with DEBUG...

But this is the age of windows... and personally, I think that black screen with linear, line by line input gets a bit old after a while...

SO...

I am making a tool in VB to aid in the creation of assembly routines for QBasic...

When I get done... it "Should" be able to Assemble and Disassemble ASM code using the 16bit commands available in DEBUG...
I am not using DEBUG to execute the assembly of the code...
I generated a list of opcodes & commands from DEBUG to include in the program to do everything interally without external support (DEBUG) for assembly.

The main point of this is to simplify the process...
I have added a few cool little features so far:
There is a field to type the name of the Sub/Function,
A field for the Code,
and A list box that contains the parameters for the sub, that you use a dialog to add, with a drop-down for the Data Types...
In the main window, when you are typing in the code window you can double click a param from the list box and it's [bp+xx] address will be automatically calculated depending of how many PUSHes and POPs occur prior to the cursor position...

Would anyone be interested in this?
Does anyone have any suggestions on features you would like to see included in this...?

Tell me what you think...

Have Fun, Be Young... Code BASIC
-Josh Stribling
cubee101.gif

 
Sounds good, I would definately be interested.
 
Have you ever gotten disk access in Debug to work in windows 2000? Or any for that matter. I can't get it to work in 2k. I'm guessing it's because it uses direct hardware access or something.
 
I have no Idea...
I usually use asm with QB for graphics and other calculations...

Plus...
I never used win 2k...
I went straight from 98 / NT to XP on both...

I was told to avoid 2000 and especially ME ...

sorry, I can't help ya there... :-(

Have you posted your question on the assembly forum?

I am assuming it "should" work since the same opcodes are used in all of the other DOS programs that write to the disk.

Have Fun, Be Young... Code BASIC
-Josh Stribling
cubee101.gif

 
Hehe, you were told to avoid 2000? Whoever recommended that to you was misinformed :) Windows 2000 is the most stable of the mainstream Windows line yet released. It lacks a few of the features of XP, but in part that is what actually makes it stable. Also, 2000 is faster than XP -- in some areas, such as named pipes, it is 3 times faster. However, if you're happy with XP, you should stick with it :) My apologies for the off-topic post.
 
Thats fine...

I work for a paranoid company when it comes to switching software...

I was on NT 4.0 until a week or 2 ago...

As for my home computer... I usually just go with whatever comes on It...
My last computer was an HP Pavillion with Win98 SE
My New PC is a Dell Dimension 4500 with WinXP

I know WinME sucked... my dad had that and hated it.
Now he has WinXP and loves it...

I never really used Win2K for any length of time except to trouble shoot software on other peoples PCs at work...

Now they are switching everything over to XP.

I can see your point with 2K being more stable because of the lack of features XP has...
Microsoft tends to have buggy feature a majority of the time...
I have not had many problems with XP...
I think it locked up 1 time after I left a program running for 2 months straight ;-)
But it is much better than 98 (which got to the point where it started locking up daily if not hourly)
And for a long time, I know 98 was the most stable (at least over WinME)

I think the Task Manager works much better on XP, and seems to prevent/correct many problems...

But like I said... My experience with Win2K is very limited.

Thanks for your opinion.

Have Fun, Be Young... Code BASIC
-Josh Stribling
cubee101.gif

 
I truly like this. It would be great to be used in a kernel or GUI progarm.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top