On 2021-10-13, Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh@hoffmanlabs.invalid> wrote:
>
> Not that I'd expect to ever meet Macroo32. ?
>

:-)

What would an object orientated version of Macro-32 even look like ? :-)

Anyone want to have a guess at possible syntax options ? :-)

BTW, you could always add some structured language constructs to
the Macro-32 compiler that could get translated into normal
Macro-32 code before compiling it:

.while(R0 != 0)
{
[Normal Macro-32 code]
}

or:

.if(R0 & 1)
{
[Normal Macro-32 code]
}
.else
{
[Normal Macro-32 code]
}

or:

.for(R0 = 0; R0 < R1; R0++)
{
[Normal Macro-32 code]
}

:-)

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On Thursday, October 14, 2021 at 2:49:54 PM UTC-4, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2021-10-13, Stephen Hoffman <seao...@hoffmanlabs.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > Not that I'd expect to ever meet Macroo32. ?
> >
>
> :-)
>
> What would an object orientated version of Macro-32 even look like ? :-)
>
> Anyone want to have a guess at possible syntax options ? :-)
>
> BTW, you could always add some structured language constructs to
> the Macro-32 compiler that could get translated into normal
> Macro-32 code before compiling it:
>
> .while(R0 != 0)
> {
> [Normal Macro-32 code]
> }
>
> or:
>
> .if(R0 & 1)
> {
> [Normal Macro-32 code]
> }
> .else
> {
> [Normal Macro-32 code]
> }
>
> or:
>
> .for(R0 = 0; R0 < R1; R0++)
> {
> [Normal Macro-32 code]
> }
>
> :-)
>
> Simon.
>
> --
> Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
> Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

Seriously??

I beleive that the comment was made in jest. No one in their right mind would ever expect t see an OO Macro.
The MACRO32 compiler was created in order to simplify the port to Alpha initially and to allow for the "easy" port for customers as well.
I spent over 2 years working with customers in this role both prior to and after the public release of Alpha. With the one exception of a customer CLI written entirely in MACRO32, most customers had small amounts of code in this language that required some change, most of which was differences in module headers (e.g. entry points and save masks). Yes, there were other changes as well, but are not worth enumerating here.

I know of a couple of systems written in Macro32 that still run today even on IA64 boxes. The cost to re-write was not worth it considering that the compiler existed. I don't know of any NEW code being written other than procedurally required updates to existing systems.

So no, I don't ever expect to see OO at this level. It makes no sense. There are existing languages that handle this at a higher level where the concept belongs.

On 10/14/2021 1:49 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2021-10-13, Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh@hoffmanlabs.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> Not that I'd expect to ever meet Macroo32. ?
>>
>
> :-)
>
> What would an object orientated version of Macro-32 even look like ? :-)
>
> Anyone want to have a guess at possible syntax options ? :-)
>
> BTW, you could always add some structured language constructs to
> the Macro-32 compiler that could get translated into normal
> Macro-32 code before compiling it:
>
> .while(R0 != 0)
> {
> [Normal Macro-32 code]
> }
>
> or:
>
> .if(R0 & 1)
> {
> [Normal Macro-32 code]
> }
> .else
> {
> [Normal Macro-32 code]
> }
>
> or:
>
> .for(R0 = 0; R0 < R1; R0++)
> {
> [Normal Macro-32 code]
> }
>
> :-)
>
> Simon.
>

This would be an abomination.

Way way way back in the day, this sort of thing gained some
popularity in the PDP11 MACRO-11 world. It was implemented by a set of
macros called SMACIT, that enabled this sort of thing. I didn't like it
then either....

--
Lee K. Gleason N5ZMR
Control-G Consultants
lee.gleason@comcast.net

On 2021-10-14 18:49:52 +0000, Simon Clubley said:

> On 2021-10-13, Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh@hoffmanlabs.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> Not that I'd expect to ever meet Macroo32.
>>
>
> :-)
>
> What would an object orientated version of Macro-32 even look like ? :-)

Um, an abomination?

Of the more recent OO options that can work for embedded and can work
directly with hardware registers, prolly Rust with one or more crates
for the platform hardware involved.

https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/embedded-book/

For the next decade or so and what would be typical for refactoring or
rewriting existing OpenVMS Macro32, it'll probably get rewritten into C.

Possibly C with either classic OpenVMS built-ins or with asm mixed in.

Somewhat longer term, I'd consider a mix of Zig and C.

Neither of which are OO, of course.

If I'm working with application code and not working directly with
hardware registers, there are many fine choices, OO and otherwise.

--
Pure Personal Opinion | HoffmanLabs LLC

In article <Yk2aJ.206815$Kv2.105764@fx47.iad>, Lee Gleason <lee.gleason@comcast.net> writes:
>On 10/14/2021 1:49 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> On 2021-10-13, Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh@hoffmanlabs.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> Not that I'd expect to ever meet Macroo32. ?
>>>
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> What would an object orientated version of Macro-32 even look like ? :-)
>>
>> Anyone want to have a guess at possible syntax options ? :-)
>>
>> BTW, you could always add some structured language constructs to
>> the Macro-32 compiler that could get translated into normal
>> Macro-32 code before compiling it:
>>
>> .while(R0 != 0)

How does a directive see and active value in R0 and oring it with 0 does
nothing.

>> {
>> [Normal Macro-32 code]
>> }
>>
>> or:
>>
>> .if(R0 & 1)

Again, how does a directive ...

>> {
>> [Normal Macro-32 code]
>> }
>> .else
>> {
>> [Normal Macro-32 code]
>> }
>>
>> or:
>>
>> .for(R0 = 0; R0 < R1; R0++)

That's just FN fugly.

>> {
>> [Normal Macro-32 code]
>> }
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> Simon.
>>
>
> This would be an abomination.
>
> Way way way back in the day, this sort of thing gained some
>popularity in the PDP11 MACRO-11 world. It was implemented by a set of
>macros called SMACIT, that enabled this sort of thing. I didn't like it
>then either....

Leave Macro alone!

--
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG

I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.

On 2021-10-14, abrsvc <dansabrservices@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Seriously??
>

I'm going to turn that around and ask you:

Seriously, Dan, seriously ??? :-)

There are 4 ":-)" symbols in the original posting and it was written
very much tongue in cheek.

There are some ideas that are so insane to implement (ie: OO Macro-32)
that, even when they are made in jest (like indeed Stephen did), it's
actually fun to think what that would look like if someone was crazy
enough to try and implement the idea.

Either you got out of the wrong side of the bed yesterday or you are
missing the ability to detect humour. :-)

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On 2021-10-14, Lee Gleason <lee.gleason@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> This would be an abomination.
>

:-)

> Way way way back in the day, this sort of thing gained some
> popularity in the PDP11 MACRO-11 world. It was implemented by a set of
> macros called SMACIT, that enabled this sort of thing. I didn't like it
> then either....
>

Microsoft actually did a more primitive version of the while() loop
above in MASM back about 30 years ago. Don't know if anyone ever used
that and other constructs however. :-)

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On 2021-10-14, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG <VAXman-@SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote:
> In article <Yk2aJ.206815$Kv2.105764@fx47.iad>, Lee Gleason <lee.gleason@comcast.net> writes:
>>On 10/14/2021 1:49 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>> On 2021-10-13, Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh@hoffmanlabs.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Not that I'd expect to ever meet Macroo32. ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> What would an object orientated version of Macro-32 even look like ? :-)
>>>
>>> Anyone want to have a guess at possible syntax options ? :-)
>>>
>>> BTW, you could always add some structured language constructs to
>>> the Macro-32 compiler that could get translated into normal
>>> Macro-32 code before compiling it:
>>>
>>> .while(R0 != 0)
>
> How does a directive see and active value in R0 and oring it with 0 does
> nothing.
>

'!=' is the not equals operator from C, not the OR operator.

If anyone actually wanted to do this, the directive would be expanded
to actual Macro-32 code before being compiled. Microsoft did something
similar in MASM about 30 years ago.

>>>
>>> or:
>>>
>>> .for(R0 = 0; R0 < R1; R0++)
>
> That's just FN fugly.
>

Suspected that would be your response. :-)

>>
>> This would be an abomination.
>>
>> Way way way back in the day, this sort of thing gained some
>>popularity in the PDP11 MACRO-11 world. It was implemented by a set of
>>macros called SMACIT, that enabled this sort of thing. I didn't like it
>>then either....
>
> Leave Macro alone!
>

:-)

On a more serious note, I think the time for enhancing assemblers
with stuff like this has long since passed.

Blame Stephen for putting the idea of OO Macro-32 into my head. :-)

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On 2021-10-14, Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh@hoffmanlabs.invalid> wrote:
> On 2021-10-14 18:49:52 +0000, Simon Clubley said:
>
>> On 2021-10-13, Stephen Hoffman <seaohveh@hoffmanlabs.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> Not that I'd expect to ever meet Macroo32.
>>>
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> What would an object orientated version of Macro-32 even look like ? :-)
>
> Um, an abomination?
>

Yes, big time. It's your fault for putting the idea of OO Macro-32 into
my head. :-) Even as a joke (as you clearly intended it), I just found
the whole idea of that concept amusing. :-)

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On 10/15/2021 1:16 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2021-10-14, abrsvc <dansabrservices@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Seriously??
>>
>
> I'm going to turn that around and ask you:
>
> Seriously, Dan, seriously ??? :-)
>
> There are 4 ":-)" symbols in the original posting and it was written
> very much tongue in cheek.
>
> There are some ideas that are so insane to implement (ie: OO Macro-32)
> that, even when they are made in jest (like indeed Stephen did), it's
> actually fun to think what that would look like if someone was crazy
> enough to try and implement the idea.
>
> Either you got out of the wrong side of the bed yesterday or you are
> missing the ability to detect humour. :-)
>
> Simon.
>

Perhaps Simon's humor is sometimes well hidden?

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:

> BTW, you could always add some structured language constructs to
> the Macro-32 compiler that could get translated into normal
> Macro-32 code before compiling it:
>
> .while(R0 != 0)
> {
> [Normal Macro-32 code]
> }
>
> or:
>
> .if(R0 & 1)
> {
> [Normal Macro-32 code]
> }
> .else
> {
> [Normal Macro-32 code]
> }
>
> or:
>
> .for(R0 = 0; R0 < R1; R0++)
> {
> [Normal Macro-32 code]
> }

I've read the entire thread so far, so I know that you are joking here.

I just wanted to point out that DEC (remember them? the parent company to
Digital?) supplied a set of structured programming macros ( IF, ELSIF, ELSE,
ENDIF, DO, ENDDO) in the standard universal file ("header file") MACSYM for
Macro-10.

While many old hands objected to their use, my late friend Mark Crispin used
them extensively in his programs, and I learned them from his code. Older
style programs used "literals" (out of line code snippets) to handle the same
kinds of things, which makes for spaghetti binaries, while the macros put
everything in-line, so that even a novice programmer can see what's going on in
the debugger.

--
Rich Alderson news@alderson.users.panix.com
Audendum est, et veritas investiganda; quam etiamsi non assequamur,
omnino tamen proprius, quam nunc sumus, ad eam perveniemus.
--Galen

On 2021-10-15, Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
>
> Perhaps Simon's humor is sometimes well hidden?
>

Simon's sense of humour is absolutely fine. :-) It's not my fault if
you Americans don't understand humour unless it's rammed down your
throat. :-) :-)

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.