Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!ogicse!decwrl!shelby!portia!dhinds
From: dhinds@portia.Stanford.EDU (David Hinds)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: TASM vs MASM (Summary)
Message-ID: <9495@portia.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 24 Feb 90 00:38:42 GMT
References: <25E362E8.4236@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca> <478@nrcvax.NRC.COM>
Sender: David Hinds <dhinds@portia.stanford.edu>
Organization: Stanford University
Lines: 16

In article <478@nrcvax.NRC.COM>, rick@NRC.COM (Rick Wagner) writes:
> 
> Just out of curiosity, do many of you use the TASM "IDEAL" mode?  I
> looked it over when I first got TASM; I liked the strong type
> checking, and the better structure definitions (the ability to use the
> same symbol in multiple structures! At last :) !).  But I really
> dislike the way you have to bracket memory references...

    I guess I never got used to the strange and strongly error-inducing
distinction between "variables" and "labels" in normal 80x86 assembly
language.  In Ideal mode, you have to type some extra brackets, but I
find it easier to figure out what is going on, and easier to tell the
assembler exactly what I want it to do.

 -David Hinds
  dhinds@portia.stanford.edu