MASM progammer.
Moderators: jesterKing, stiv
MASM progammer.
Hai. Im programming use Pelles C and MASM. If I want to porting it to MASM project which file or link I should read first?
I never say I have this whole universe, and I never I am and angel. Im just human beeing. Just like you.
-
simonharvey
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 8:11 am
Re: MASM progammer.
Is this a blender project?Farabi wrote:Hai. Im programming use Pelles C and MASM. If I want to porting it to MASM project which file or link I should read first?
Could you please rewrite your post.
Kind Regards
Simon Harvey
Re: MASM progammer.
Yes. I want to made a MASM project, maybe by linking the library or just use the .dll if it allowed.simonharvey wrote:Is this a blender project?Farabi wrote:Hai. Im programming use Pelles C and MASM. If I want to porting it to MASM project which file or link I should read first?
Could you please rewrite your post.
Kind Regards
Simon Harvey
I never say I have this whole universe, and I never I am and angel. Im just human beeing. Just like you.
Blender is a very large, fairly complicated program to be porting to assembly. I don't think you realize the amount of work it would entail.
Do you want to do this just because you're a Microsoft junkie? Or because you want to use Blender on an obseleted machine which doesn't have a modern C/C++ compiler? (I can't think of anything but museum pieces that don't though.)
The reason Blender exists as it does is for purposes of portability. The current source tree compiles under Windows, Mac, most Unices, and I think a couple of other weird platforms. By spending all your time porting to assembly you'll have only accomplished writing a non-portable, non-upgradable, and most likely a non-fully-functional version of Blender.
If you're thinking about possible speed enhancements, again you'd be wasting your time. It would be better spent improving the current code's bottlenecks.
There are very few things you need to code entirely in assembly or machine code. My advice is to forget it. Sorry.
Do you want to do this just because you're a Microsoft junkie? Or because you want to use Blender on an obseleted machine which doesn't have a modern C/C++ compiler? (I can't think of anything but museum pieces that don't though.)
The reason Blender exists as it does is for purposes of portability. The current source tree compiles under Windows, Mac, most Unices, and I think a couple of other weird platforms. By spending all your time porting to assembly you'll have only accomplished writing a non-portable, non-upgradable, and most likely a non-fully-functional version of Blender.
If you're thinking about possible speed enhancements, again you'd be wasting your time. It would be better spent improving the current code's bottlenecks.
There are very few things you need to code entirely in assembly or machine code. My advice is to forget it. Sorry.