Antidisassemblage

Gambit · Post by **Gambit** » Sun 24 Apr, 2005 5:00 am

Antidisassemblage looks nice, and it most definitely is better than 1 include file'll ever be

CoBB · Post by **CoBB** » Sun 24 Apr, 2005 6:08 am

Does it look nice? Are you a member?

Post by **DarkAuron** » Sun 24 Apr, 2005 6:38 am

"This is NOT "professional software" though, and is very simplified from what you would see in "real" languages like C or Java.

Java? A 'real' language? HA! A really slow and annoying as hell language, that's what it is! DEATH~! And I bet having a ti-84+SE on the front page makes them feel reallllly special

Gambit · Post by **Gambit** » Sun 24 Apr, 2005 6:58 am

CoBB wrote:Does it look nice? Are you a member?

No I'm not, but I talked to the head programmer on #tcpa. I forgot the syntax, but you can compile code w/ do-whiles and if statements

The output which gets assembled by good ol' TASM and linked w/ devpac8x.

Of course, the code is not optimized by any means... *shudders*

CoBB · Post by **CoBB** » Sun 24 Apr, 2005 7:08 am

I don't think the creator's words are the best source of information when it comes to evaluating a product. Getting a simple block structure to compile isn't too hard, pouring out optimised code is; look at z88dk or sdcc. I wonder what user extensibility entails in the case of AD, but I suspect some kind of macro magic here.

Why is the information locked away in a members only section? At least the docs should be public.

Gambit · Post by **Gambit** » Sun 24 Apr, 2005 8:07 am

CoBB wrote:I wonder what user extensibility entails in the case of AD, but I suspect some kind of macro magic here.

Yay! I found them! *thanks moko|log*

So someone would type this up:

Code: Select all

/* chars.ads by Dan Cook
 *
 * Prints all the character values in a 15x18
 * grid using the small (variable width) font.
 * Note that all variables start with a defualt
 * value of zero unless they are tied to some
 * address (i.e. CurRow, PenRow, and PenCol).
 */
 
#include "ti83plus.ads"
#include "text.ads"
 
void main() {
    byte ch;
    .ClrHome();
    CurRow = 6;
    PenRow = 0;
    PenCol = 0;
    do {
        .TextC(ch);
        if(PenCol < 108) PenCol = PenCol + 6;
        else {
            PenCol = 0;
            PenRow = PenRow + 6;
        }
    } while(ch <= 255);
}

And adsmblg would compile it to assembly code. Unfortunately, rafb.net/paste didn't preserve the include files...

but I can tell you that there are alot of #define macros and such. We were debugging the output of this piece of code last night (Friday)...

/edit: Yay! I found a (working) link! Undebugged code that was generated from above w/ adsmblg:

Code: Select all

.nolist
#include "ti83plus.inc"
.list
 .org userMem-2
 .db t2ByteTok, tAsmCmp
 
func_main:
 B_CALL(_ClrScrnFull)
 LD A,6
 LD (CurRow),A
 LD A,0
 LD (PenRow),A
 LD A,0
 LD (PenCol),A
Label5:         ; <DO-WHILE>   ; WAS <DO->WHILE
 LD A,(local_vars+0)
 B_CALL(_VPutMap)
                ; <IF>
 LD A,(PenCol)
 CP 108
 JP C,Label8                 ;WAS JP C,LabelLabel8
 LD A,(PenCol)
 ADD A,6
 LD (PenCol),A
 JP Label9      ; skip else code
Label8:         ; <ELSE>
 LD A,0
 LD (PenCol),A
 LD A,(PenRow)
 ADD A,6
 LD (PenRow),A
Label9:         ; <End IF-ELSE>
 LD A,(local_vars+0)
 INC A
 LD (local_vars+0),A
 LD A,255
 LD HL,local_vars+0        ;WAS CP (local_vars+0)
 CP (HL)                     ;INSERTED
 JP C,Label5                 ;WAS JP C,LabelLabel5
Label7:         ; <End WHILE
 RET
 
local_vars:
 .DB 0
.END
.END

Messy indeed

@kv83: Probably not programming help anymore

CoBB · Post by **CoBB** » Sun 24 Apr, 2005 9:33 am

Why is ch increased? It never happens in the source. Also, it is always true that a byte value is less than or equal to 255, while the generated code calculates exactly the opposite (it never loops).

Gambit · Post by **Gambit** » Sun 24 Apr, 2005 9:48 am

Well, I was lucky enough to actually find a link to the assembly output that works (out of many). Apparently, Dan didn't give us an updated version of the source, since it was just 1 change... btw CoBB, I think you ought to be talking to Dan (a.k.a. CrazyProg) instead of me about adsmblg

CoBB · Post by **CoBB** » Sun 24 Apr, 2005 10:00 am

I don't plan to interfere with the project in any way, but it would have been nice to have been able to read something about it.

kv83 · Post by **kv83** » Sun 24 Apr, 2005 2:24 pm

Gambit wrote:@kv83: Probably not programming help anymore

Happy now?

DJ_O · Post by **DJ_O** » Sun 24 Apr, 2005 2:57 pm

The project look nice but not very professional. It's actually a simplified version of java. It might be useful but I dunno if it's too much limited. Also the author said that in may he leave the TI community for 2 year to serve as a missionary for his church so the project is most likely on hiatus

Post by **tr1p1ea** » Sun 24 Apr, 2005 6:12 pm

Ahh i suspected that this was CrazyProg, he has been on #tcpa discussing this project.

DJ_O · Post by **DJ_O** » Sun 24 Apr, 2005 8:44 pm

Yeah it is, he talked to me on AIM about it.

ISUCK · Post by **ISUCK** » Sun 24 Apr, 2005 10:58 pm

It said you had to post a comment or tell why you wanted to be in this group... and I didn't really wanna type stuff

DJ_O · Post by **DJ_O** » Sun 24 Apr, 2005 11:08 pm

Yeah I know and this was annoying. It took a whole week before I get accepted in the group then the programmer AIMed me to ask me why I wanted to join the group and he seemed disapointed by the fact it was just to check the project :p . Anyway I might try it someday