On 22 aug 2006, at 11:44, Michael Preslar wrote:
If I change ax to eax, di to edi and es:[di] to [di], the code
compiles without warnings or errors, but I don't know if that's
the right thing to do.
No. The calling conventions are different
Any further information you could give? The documentation doesn't
have any specifics on the differences..
Porting 16 bit assembler for a segmented memory model to a 32 bit
selector/offset memory model is not something which can be shortly
summarised, and it's not possible by simply replacing a few
statements by others.
This tackles one procedure but there are a good dozen or so more to
go. Having someone help port them would be quickest, but I won't
learn how to maintain them myself..
You have to understand what the assembler code does to be able to
port it to 32 bits, regardless of whether you want to keep it in
assembler or translate it into Pascal.
(and possibly a {$inline on} globally for that unit)
{$inline on} ? Never heard of this one.. What's it do?
It turns on support for the "inline" keyword, which says that the
code in a procedure's body should be inlined at calling sites.
Jonas
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
