🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1627@ultb.UUCP>, clf3678@ultb.UUCP (C.L. Freemesser) writes...

>I'm looking to start programming on the ST.  I would prefer to use
>Assembly over a high level language, but am not sure of the best package
>to get.  I've heard AssemPro is quite good.  Anybody have any comments
>on this or another package?

>The price I've seen is about $40 from MicroTyme.  I know these folks are
>good, and the price looks right.

I use Assempro regularly, and have done so for more than 2 years. 

The assembler works quite well, compiling anything I gave it easily. 
However, my style is not common in that I seldom use include files of 
the C sort; that is, lists of equates and defines. This style works well 
for Assempro for 2 reasons: 1, the included macro libraries are not 
worth the effort of using. I think that the author produced libraries 
for his own use, and I find them useless. 2, the debugger can't tell 
which name you equated to a number very well. It appears to use the 
first occurence in debugging, which can be confusing. I generally use 
include files for logically related portions of source code. I would 
reccommend it as it appears to be one of the most inexpensive commercial 
assemblers around, and works well for the price.

One warning: it uses a few constructs which are not Motorols standard, I 
think it's the directives for setting portions to even addresses, but 
I've had no problems.

>Chris Freemesser, Rochester Institute of Technology :BITNET:%clf3678@RITVAX
(rest of sig deleted)
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Kitakaze Tatsu Raito	Neil Gilmore     internet:gilmore@macc.wisc.edu | 
| Jararvellir,          MACC, UW-Madison bitnet: gilmore@wiscmac3       |  
| Middle Kingdom        Madison, Wi                                     |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+