So to david nugent do I speak these words:


Wednesday October 06 1993 00:13, david nugent wrote to Steven Pasztor:



 >> It's just that most of my interesting ASM routines are
 >> designed for interfacing with TP. And it seems much simpler
 >> then the C equivelents... Expecialy at times when you don't
 >> need the extra length!
 dn> Assuming you've used inline ASM, why not simply "port" those to C
 dn> functions verbatum?

Still need to either hand it a TP string, not a C++ string...

Which would be most likely to be usefull, adding TP string support to C++,
and using it to drive the ASM routines, or converting the ASM routines to
handle C++? I'm better with ASM then C++, so it'd be easyer to change the
ASM routines, but which would be more usefull!


nevets


... A horse may go freely to water, but a pencil must be lead

--- FMail 0.94