4 ms·

If you're actually writing software in assembly (as opposed to merely optimizing hot functions in an otherwise high-level codebase), in my experience MASM is th

by Retr0id 3mo ago

If you're actually writing software in assembly (as opposed to merely optimizing hot functions in an otherwise high-level codebase), in my experience MASM is the most pleasant tool for the job.

b5n 3mo ago
The most pleasant is the one you're most familiar with. I still use gas with at&t syntax.
- Retr0id 3mo ago
  MASM's niceties go far beyond just syntax, though
  - tengwar2 3mo ago
    I last used MASM back in about 1989 (with MS C on OS/2 1.0). Do you have any hints on how it has changed since then? What is nice about it, and why does the debugger not match up to CodeView?
adrian_b 3mo ago
MASM was a decent assembler, but it also had some syntax choices that lead to excessive verbosity. In any case, today nasm is mostly equivalent with it, if not better, while being kept much more up-to-date with the Intel-AMD ISA extensions.
- not_a9 3mo ago
  Out of idle curiosity: can NASM emit Windows unwind information? For the matter, can any assembler do so automatically?