Re: Release of RosAsm V.2.025a

"Paul Dunn" <paul.dunn4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> écrivait
news:4kjUe.5264$zw1.1757@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

>> Then, if this is what my explanation describe, why are
>> you saying that i am saying otherwise?
> 
> See above - I honestly thought you were claiming one thing and then
> *doing* another. I now see that you meant something completely
> different and the rest of us, in our ignorance, didn't quite
> understand what you meant. I really do think that a lot of your
> blowing off is just the result of this language barrier that you're
> fighting against. Still, your English is doubtless better than my
> French, so I shall try harder in future. 

On a News Group devoted to Assembly and Assemblers,
i am founded to presume that the readers are supposed
to have heard of the differences between Mono-Pass and
Multi-Pass(ses) Assemblers, which is the acception in
which i made use of this formulation. That is, what
is Mono-Pass, is the Assembler Encoder. For the computation
in charge of the JSO, it is, evidently executed as many
times as needed until no more "Long to Short" possible
case could be found.

Would this additional Computation be made default, in
RosAsm Assembler, the whole Assembler would remain
Mono-Pass, and the Compilation speed would remain the
same, with this emulation.


Betov.

< http://rosasm.org
>