Re: [Luxasm-devel] Re: Status of LuxAsm?

[Frank K. <fbk...@co...>]

NoDot wrote:
> PING! All who see *this*, respond, please.

Hi NoDot,

Yeah... I *just* saw it - suddenly downloaded some 80-odd messages 
stretching back... well, even farther than this. Thought it had been 
quiet lately...

> Frank Kotler wrote:
> 
>>> Seems the mailing
>>> list has been dead for a few months, with the last real post by
>>> NonDot...
> 
> [This wasn't recieved by me for some reason...]

I replied to an a.l.a. message, and just cc'ed it to the list as a 
"ping", of sorts...

...
> I've been gone for a while. I don't know if Beth's still here, or not, 
> nor do I know if C's here.

Well, C has checked in... Dunno what's become of Beth. Hope it's good!

I agree with Sevag, that we should decide on a syntax. "Just like Nasm", 
except where there's some good reason to alter it is okay with me! :) 
There's something to be said for "#define" as a syntax - we can pick up 
equates straight from C(the language) .h files. That's the way C(the 
developer) had it, IIRC.

Other than that thought, I really don't have anything to add, at the 
moment. Sorry not to be more inspirational...

Best,
Frank