On 09/03/2018 17:47, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 09/03/18 17:40, mm0fmf wrote:
>> On 09/03/2018 09:06, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 08/03/18 17:33, mm0fmf wrote:
>>>> On 08/03/2018 15:27, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2018 13:34:57 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 08/03/18 13:13, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2018 12:37:38 +0000, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> CORRECTION for stupid typo:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /* Prototype, put in a header file, myfunction.h  */
>>>>>>>    int myfunction(int, char*);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /* empty function as the only contents of a source file,
>>>>>>> myfunction.c
>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>>     int myfunction(int bufflth, char* buff)
>>>>>>>     {
>>>>>>>       return 0;
>>>>>>>     }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would at least put in a bit more
>>>>>>
>>>>>> int myfunction(int bufflth, char* buff)
>>>>>>      {
>>>>>>         return (int)buff[bufflth-1];
>>>>>>      }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So you know where on the stack buff and bufflth are...
>>>>>
>>>>> Why would you want to know that? All the assembler operations using
>>>>> the
>>>>> arguments will be inside myfunction() and, unless the code is
>>>>> calculating
>>>>> a result to be returned and used elsewhere, the returned value is
>>>>> probably to report success or failure.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> If it returns success or failure, why return 1 of 4 billion possible
>>>> values?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Another personm who has never coded assmebler for C..
>>>
>>> It not what you are rurining, its how to access (bufflth, char* buff)
>>> which are LOCAL stack based variables.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> As the last count, over 260 million phones were using my C and ARM
>> assembler code.
>>
> Oh? Is that why they are so much shit then ;-)
>
>
>
You would do well to read the question relating to the return type however.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05