Macros, and existing code samples.

You'll have to ask MicroPro not Microsoft. :-)

I think it would take more than that. Perhaps an account name and password, maybe some integration with steam and battle.net authenticators.

Linux and Mac developers. It allows better sharing of source code across platforms. Makes your code more compatible with Intel and AMD documentation and their code samples.

There was an Edit for Windows too. :-)

And if you are going to re-write it in cross-platform code you might as well target Windows too. A single codebase for updates going forward.

I'd go NASM, but I'd prefer MASM to be cross platform. A single source code implementation for assembly based projects. Yeah, calling conventions differ, some of that can be dealt with via macros, minimizing the conditional assembly.

Thank you. How about a MASM64 for Windows, Linux and macOS?

How do they non-consensually integrate Steam or Battle.net?

Interesting. Thank you.

LOL. A trans-ukrainian pipeline, NordStream 1, and NordStream 2 were all planned and designed and created for a reason. And that was that reality did not match German politics.

LMFAO. Why am I not surprised.

LOL. A trans-ukrainian pipeline, NordStream 1, and NordStream 2 were all planned and designed and created for a reason. And that was that reality did not match German politics.

It happened. Are you claiming it was unplanned?

Except for the parts where they need a trans-ukrainian pipeline, NordStream 1, and NordStream 2.

Which is my point, that the failing was one of operations management. That there were additional problems does not undermine this glaring evidence of bad planning. Bad planning in general is perhaps the reason that the US Coal industry has released more radiation into the environment that the US Nuclear industry.

Take it up with the US Department of Energy. They are the one who I quoted.

LOL. That explains a lot. You take Greta's word. I'll stick with the DOE's.

You are conflating theory with reality, In reality, Germany ditched nuclear for Russian natural gas. When that didn't work they were forced to use more coal. So the remove of nuclear led to increased natural gas, then to increased coal.

Now when people talk about increasing nuclear, do they refer to replacing renewables or do refer to removing coal, oil, and natural gas? You know it's the latter.

Renewables are not threatened by nuclear; coal, oil, and natural gas are threatened.

Sorry, but you are conflating what was not built for political reasons and what "does not work". Various research reactors were shutdown as rewards to greens for political support, their designs not pursued much farther as a result.

However reality is:
"Spent nuclear fuel can be recycled to make new fuel and byproducts. More than 90% of its potential energy still remains in the fuel, even after fiveyears of operation in a reactor. The United States does not currently recycle spent nuclear fuel but foreign countries, such as France, do. There are also someadvanced reactor designs in development that could consume or run on spent nuclear fuel in the future."
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.energy.gov%2Fne%2Farti...

If they can find the little plastic eating critter that produces an opiate the Pacific garbage patch problem will probably be solved pretty quickly.