Check out the new Forum!

[Bob Zale]

PowerBASIC Inline Assembler Forum.

It's new. It's here now. It will be HOT! {smile}


Bob Zale
PowerBASIC Inc.

[Arthur Gomide]

For all tastes? 16/32/64 bits?

[Cliff Nichols]

I do not know if I jumped the gun or not? But I do not see "PowerBASIC Inline Assembler Forum." in the list of Forums yet?

[Steve Rossell]

I do not know if I jumped the gun or not? But I do not see "PowerBASIC Inline Assembler Forum." in the list of Forums yet?

Try refreshing.

[Cliff Nichols]

I tried several times (Both regular refresh and Cntrl-F5) but nothing.
Then about a half hour later it appeared. (Guessing something between me and you was showing me its cache even though I was refreshing)

Anyways works fine now Thanx for the new forum

[Bern Ertl]

Excellent addition. Thanks!

[Eddy Van Esch]

:top:

[Clay Clear]

Well done, Mr. Zale & Staff! Thanks!

[Gösta H. Lovgren-2]

Now all we need is a DDT ONLY forum and life in PB Land will be complete.

====================================
"The charity that is a trifle to us
can be precious to others."
Homer"
====================================

[Michael Mattias]

>Now all we need is a DDT ONLY forum

Wait a minute. As per the equal time doctrine, and the fact many users prefer 'SDK' style, if you add a "DDT ONLY" forum it's only fair to add a "REAL MEN" forum, too.

[John Petty]

Michael
I think he just did add the "REAL MEN" forum:saythat:
John

[George Bleck]

Still waiting for the PBForms 2.0 forum <snicker>.

My money is still burning a hole in my pocket Bob

[Michael Mattias]

Real Men don't need no stinkin' inline assembly-language code.

[Michael Mattias]

>Real Men don't need no stinkin'

But seriously....

The two major "application" reasons for using assembly-langauge code are.. at least as far as I can tell...

1. Runtime speed improvements
2. Doing stuff which can't be done with the [BASIC] language intrinsics.

Let's deal with #2, first ... there's NOTHING (hacks, cracks and nasties excluded)
of which I am aware for which there is no Windows' API access. If you are supposed to be doing this, there is a function to 'do it right' for you... somewhere.

For #1, with the number and quality of the language features - specifically the support for pointer variables - what you end up with using assembly language probably differs very little from what the compiler generates .. ASSUMING you don't program like a schmuck ... in which case nothing is going to help you anyway.


That said, I can see two 'pretty good' reasons for using the inline assember:
1. You are a superstar assembly-language programmer, but in BASIC you really ARE a schmuck.

2. You have working assembly-langauge routines you really don't feel like re-inventing

OK, so I forgot one more reason: It can be FUN to write in assembly language.

MCM

[Paul Dixon]

MCM,
assembler is a useful tool. It's sometimes easier to code something in ASM than in BASIC but it's a matter of choice whether you wish to use it or not just as you might choose to use regular expressions or not.

what you end up with using assembly language probably differs very little from what the compiler generates

That's not true. For non-trivial code ASM is almost always capable of being significantly faster than compiled code.

Paul.

[Bern Ertl]

MCM, there are times when an application has to perform calculations as fast as possible. It depends upon the application.

[Michael Mattias]

>It depends upon the application.

Gee, I wish I had said that, repeatedly, and started doing so years ago.

[Cliff Nichols]

there's NOTHING (hacks, cracks and nasties excluded)
of which I am aware for which there is no Windows' API access.

I am not so sure of that, but will know better once I have learned what I need in assembly and then compare to if an API exists to do the same (I hear whispers that there may already be, but not sure)

OK, so I forgot one more reason: It can be FUN to write in assembly language.

Ok I will give you that one, since when I was using assembly on at least a weekly basis (over 15 years ago), it was fun to see end code, and figure out what went wrong and actually understand WHYYYYYyyy it was wrong

[Hedley Moses]

>Real Men don't need no stinkin'



Let's deal with #2, first ... there's NOTHING (hacks, cracks and nasties excluded)
of which I am aware for which there is no Windows' API access. If you are supposed to be doing this, there is a function to 'do it right' for you... somewhere.



MCM

How bout trying to read a particular bit on a particular sector of a movie DVD directly without opening a VOB file. I have not looked but perhaps there an API for something like that. But then I guess that would be concidered a crack attempt to possibly circumvent the copy protection

[Gösta H. Lovgren-2]

>Let's deal with #2, first ... there's NOTHING (hacks, cracks and nasties excluded)
of which I am aware for which there is no Windows' API access.

Should we infer from that statement you know everything???

============================================
And if there be no meeting past the grave,
If all is darkness, silence, yet 'tis rest.
Be not afraid, ye waiting hearts that weep,
For still He giveth His beloved sleep,
And if an endless sleep He wills, so best.
Henrietta Anne Huxley,
written on her husband
Thomas Henry Huxley's tombstone.
============================================