Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-

x86 ASM

Name: OP 2010-07-13 15:00

C++.

Is _asm{} as useful as i think it is? for example writing a function that passes it's parametersto _asm{} and then does some loops/if's etc then returns back. That would be more efficient (for mass/batch use) than if i wrote the function in C++ right?

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 15:02

Yes, but you're negating any positive effect by writing the rest of it in C++.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 15:06

>>2
lol you rekon he should write it all in ASM?

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 15:09

>>3
lol yes because a decent compiler will optimise short bits of code to their equivalents in assembly. If you're going to prematurely optimise like this, you should do it with a substantial chunk of bottlenecked code.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 15:39

>>3
You Sepples apologists always seem to miss the point spectacularly. Is this intentional?

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 16:06

>>4
"portable assembler" compilers 'optimize' (cf. compile,  v. [5]) all code into their equivalents in assembly.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:30

>>5
How can we get the point when your points are implied and not explicit?

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 20:33

>>7
Just ignore him. He's like that.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 11:35

Don't prematurely 'optimise' your code. 19/20 times, your compiler will probably do a better job.
Once you master x86 assembly, and C/C++, then you'll know what to use what for.
Though I could probably write quite a bit of my code in assembly, I know better than to do that.
I've only used assembly for hooking applications (I don't have the .exe source, but I do have the source to a .dll it loads, so I patch the memory at run-time and redirect flow into my .dll using assembly)

tl;dr if you should do it, you would *know* already

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 11:41

>>7-8
SPAWHBTC

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 11:43

Not again

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 12:09

I've never gotten the point of inline assembly (except for platform-specific magic in system libraries); surely, you cannot write it as freely as you could if you wrote the whole program?  The other registers must surely be troubled by the inline code messing things up?

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 12:12

>>12
There are macros that let you set which registers to save / restore.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 14:37

OPTIMIZATION OF THE ESCHATON IS THE END OF DAYS

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 19:18

>>1

Stupid programmers write lots of assembly all over the place.  Smart programmers write a decent language and spend the extra time getting laid.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 19:22

>>15
programmers
getting laid
wat

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 19:23

>>16
It happens, and sometimes not even by accident.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 19:45

>>17
However, it's always by payment

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 21:11

>>18
That's not true, one time the woman was too timid to prosecute

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-16 4:28

>>18
Have you fucked your [n]Erika[/b] today?

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-16 4:58

>>20
I hear it's a tight fit.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-16 6:25

>>20
Have you {i fucked your {sup.u B}{sub.o B}{m.b C{sup o{sup d{sup e}}}}} today{i ?}

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-17 22:23

>>22
I'm sorry, I don't speak toy.

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List