Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > Interests > Tilted Technology


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 09-23-2004, 07:50 PM   #1 (permalink)
"Afternoon everybody." "NORM!"
 
Paradise Lost's Avatar
 
Location: Poland, Ohio // Clarion University of PA.
[Assembly] Not Really a Question

I don't know how many of you guys, if any has ever used Assembly, so
I think it's better to ask if any of you guys know any good sources about
programming in Assembly, notably, the MASM Assembly Language for Intel
IA-32 Machines.

Right now, trying to do the Fibonacci Sequence, but I just can't figure
out the algorithm, and I'm sure it's because of some syntax I don't know.
Figure a good resource site will keep me from asking here and broaden
my knowledge base better also.

Thanks
- Lost in Paradise
__________________
"Marino could do it."
Paradise Lost is offline  
Old 09-24-2004, 05:38 PM   #2 (permalink)
I am Winter Born
 
Pragma's Avatar
 
Location: Alexandria, VA
Do you mean nasm?

http://www.csee.umbc.edu/~plusquel/310/slides/nasm.html
http://www.drpaulcarter.com/pcasm/index.php

Those two sites look like good resources. It's been a little while since I did assembly programming, though it is a great language to learn.
Pragma is offline  
Old 10-07-2004, 02:22 PM   #3 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Gavin's Guide is usually quite handy for basic assembler stuff, http://burks.brighton.ac.uk/burks/la...smtut/asm1.htm

and the reference card from: www.jegerlehner.ch/intel is great for command syntax. Hope that helps!

Last edited by bubbagumpshrimp; 10-07-2004 at 02:23 PM.. Reason: url typo....
bubbagumpshrimp is offline  
Old 10-08-2004, 01:49 PM   #4 (permalink)
Tilted
 
kebo's Avatar
 
Location: reno,nv
I learned asm. many moons ago. However since then I learned that time spent writing (and debugging, no program is totaly without debugging) a program is proportional to the number lines of code in the program. Since then I don't touch asm unless it is absolutely necessary. My language of choice is the one that does the most with the fewest lines of code: Basic. If I can't do it there, then it is C or C++.
kevin
kebo is offline  
Old 10-10-2004, 07:59 PM   #5 (permalink)
Upright
 
Location: Afton, MN
Can I ask why you want to do this? I would be satisfied with "because I want to" because that would just be fun to write -- and actually get working.

I am a C'er myself.

Mike
__________________
When tired sleep, when hungry eat
!ego
Rummey is offline  
Old 10-12-2004, 12:45 AM   #6 (permalink)
Upright
 
Location: Boulder, Colorado
A reference that I use quite often is The Art of Assembly
__________________
/K
ketamine is offline  
Old 10-13-2004, 06:11 AM   #7 (permalink)
Tilted
 
In my Intro to Computer Systems class (it's a cs class where you learn how the cpu and stuff works in order to better understand how to write better and faster code) we had to learn basic asm and gdb to order to extract "passwords" and perform buffer overflow exploits for homework. I think it's made me a better programmer, but I would never write asm unless it's necessary. Even in our current optimization assignment, we are using pure C and use our knowledge on how the complier works to get the asm code we want. Anyways, I'm kinda biased to say that knowing asm is good for debugging purposes and just understanding how everything works (or writing an OS kernal :P).

Anyways, what's hanging you up with the algorithm? You can do the basic recursion/loop method to get F(n+1) = F(n) + F(n-1). You can also calculate it "directly" by using the explicit formula which is all over the net. The reason i write explicit in quotes is because it would use floating point numbers which would give you rounding and thus would not give you the right answer (hmm maybe if you just rounded to an int it probably would work)
__________________
sometimes it just takes a cat
froseph is offline  
Old 10-13-2004, 11:08 AM   #8 (permalink)
Addict
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by froseph
The reason i write explicit in quotes is because it would use floating point numbers which would give you rounding and thus would not give you the right answer (hmm maybe if you just rounded to an int it probably would work)
Well, if you check out MathWorld,
you can find some explicit formulas that are derived using the NINT and FLOOR functions. There's also one using the determinant of a matrix of 0 and 1 entries which could be useful, and a few explicit finite sums.

Last edited by phukraut; 10-13-2004 at 11:10 AM..
phukraut is offline  
 

Tags
assembly, question


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:57 PM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360