XProfan

- Page 1 -

If it you (almost) mere circa Speicheroperationen goes (Bilderzeux?) then becomes PB Prf2CPP take down, but XProfanInlineAsm depends PB ex.

the Simplest against is well Prf2CPP, the fastest InlineAsm, The middle PB. ~rin~

RGH

with Prf2CPP hang very plenty of it ex, whom C++-Compiler You verwendest. The differences are there quite big. of/ one the allerschnellsten is still the Borland Compiler! whom Borland Compiler C++ 5.5 there as Konsolenversion free. The of it begot code lying in the tempo right near on the Assembler.
(The Difference to the others Freeware-Compilern totals oftmals until factor 10!)
and the application of Prf2CPP is too right simply: once into User Menu as Plugin eingebunden reicht one Click, circa from seinem kompletten XProfan 10-Program a speedy EXE To make!

Greeting
Roland

Intel Duo E8400 3,0 GHz / 4 GB RAM / 1000 GB HDD - ATI Radeon HD 4770 512 MB - Windows 7 Home Premium 32Bit - XProfan X4

moreover must so did i yet say, the it neither integrally so difficult is, ASM To learn. Have for my first driver 3 days used and knew of ASM before quite nothing.

Georg
Hovenbitzer

Vielen Thanks on you all.

i'll well Profan² with Profan2CPP and the Borland Compiler using.
ASM would a good alternative, but moreover I will longer as three days need.

comes with on The list I everything time try would like.

@Roland
gives it already a deadline ex when one Profan 10 buy can ?

Viele Grüsse, Georg Hovenbitzer(Windows XP Pro, XProfan 11.2, Profan2Cpp 1.6a)

[quote:24925e892e=iF]If it you (almost) mere circa Speicheroperationen goes (Bilderzeux?) then becomes PB Prf2CPP take down, but XProfanInlineAsm depends PB ex.

the Simplest against is well Prf2CPP, the fastest InlineAsm, The middle PB. ~rin~[/quote:24925e892e]
and PureBasic InlineASM or DirectASM depends against this ex

12/04/06 ▲

Frank
Abbing

...where XProfan InlineAssembler whom benefit has, all MASM-extensions (z.B. Macros and Highlevel-Syntax) benefit to. The Geschwindigkeitsvorteil is additionally so well How not messbar.

12/04/06 ▲

[quote:5fbab8d131=Frank Abbing]...where XProfan InlineAssembler whom benefit has, all MASM-extensions (z.B. Macros and Highlevel-Syntax) benefit to. The Geschwindigkeitsvorteil is additionally so well How not messbar.[/quote:5fbab8d131]
where FASM whom benefit has, any actually CPU extensions To support, including 64-bit Systemen, ASM-Macros go self-evident too supported, all HighLevel-extensions of MASM Gibts too as Macro for FASM.

yust my 2 cents

was FASM not OpenSource? If Yes, @Thomas. what speaks against FASM instead of MASM in XPIA? Dou you mean You get it there? or Frank?

[quote:5545983286=iF]was FASM not OpenSource? If Yes, @Thomas. what speaks against FASM instead of MASM in XPIA? Dou you mean You get it there? or Frank?[/quote:5545983286]
me are missing The ASM-Kenntnisse and Frank is Yes in MASM solid wellworn. for XPIA would it too no advantages bring.
me I ment only around the allegedly detriments the ASM-Support in PB, The No are

Frank
Abbing

[quote:1fb5d0253d]was FASM not OpenSource? If Yes, @Thomas. what speaks against FASM instead of MASM in XPIA?[/quote:1fb5d0253d]
I see there too no advantages. XPIAs MASM-installation is Yes very simply held. who with Assembler program wants, get the loosly there.

but Thomas ebend meant You yet :any actually CPU extensions To support, including 64-bit Systemen...

Why then for XPIA would it too no advantages bring. ?

- Page 2 -

[quote:d3f8fd7dba=iF]
Why then for XPIA would it too no advantages bring. ?[/quote:d3f8fd7dba]
because XProfan with 64--bit not bypass can. yet not time Quad or. INT64 are possible. MMX, SSE3 and as pair now any heissen needed one mostly with DirectX etc. i think is not plenty bring. who this quentchen Power yet need, the ought to only ASM take or even another Language, How C z.B..