>> As Eric put it, NASM is considered more free than JWASM. > > as you probably can see there are also rather "questionable" sentences > to find > in this mailing-list. "Freedom", "Democracy", "Justice", "Fairness", ... > are > commonly regarded as positive terms and because of this they are also > favorite > words to hide other, probably not-so-positive intentions.
So, do you want to accuse me of the "not-so-positive intention" to say that JWASM has indeed disadvantages? Of course _I_ think that NASM is better. However I also listed other available, free assemblers (which are non-existant according to the FreeDOS Spec, aren't they?) and used the word "considered" in the comparison. Because it depends on how you consider freedom. > As it is common > sense to be very cautious when a second-hand car dealer starts to talk > about > "fair prices", it is also a good idea not to believe everything what is > posted > here. I don't understand how this relates to assemblers. Of course he's free to use JWASM instead. You could have posted all the great advantages of JWASM over NASM (that you surely know some) instead of this. Like that it's more "the original" of x86 Assembly than NASM. Who needs a great manual as NASM's, and therefore the possibility to easily learn preprocessor- and assembler-specific syntax? (Yes, there might be great MASM manuals or books which can be used to write JWASM Assembly. But are they "free", only like in "free of charge"?) Or a large community with more than one developer, like NASM has? Who cares about that anyway, use the great JWASM instead! Regards, Christian ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
