On Sun, 3 May 1998, Peter Gerwinski wrote:
then your external assembly routine must be named ... the same as with GNU C.
Thank you!!! 8~) The dream of OOP <sniffle, wiping tear from eye> is once again reality =B) BTW, I found that external assembly routines (I'm using NASM) allow one to use the EBP register as long as its value is preserved at the start of the routine and restored at the end. To reference the values on the stack, I used [ESP+8] for the first parameter, [ESP+n] for the next ones.
If someone understands the GNU C++ OOP backend, we could perhaps change this. Perhaps. It might also be that, due to the way multiple inheritance is implemented in C++, GPC's code is more efficient and should therefore better stay like it is.
This brings me to another question. I don't care too much for C++ OO in GPC, tho it might be cool to find a subset OO of both Pascal and C++ objects and at least support that. Which brings me to my question, let's say I have the Win32 port of GPC, is it possible to write DirectX applications? The reason I ask is because a lot of DirectX is written in C++ OO.
See ya! Orlando Llanes
"Meine Damen und Herren, Elvis hat soeben das Gebaeude verlassen!"
"Look out fo' flyeeng feet" O__/ a010111t@bc.seflin.org /|____. O <__. /> / \ ____________|_________ http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Monkey414