First3D.EXE. Help please!!!
category: general [glöplog]
ASM WORLD DOMINATION!!!
Everything is smaller and faster in well-written Assembly, including calling API functions. A clever human can always outsmart the compiler and find better ways to do things.
Tyler's code, on the other hand, is not well-written. I'm not talking about his style (no line breaks or indentaion), I'm talking about the instructions themselves. Any C complier could beat this code hands-down.
I see two reasonable courses of action here:
a.) Learn to program real assembly language.
b.) Write your "First3D.exe" in C.
I personally think assembly language rocks and use it exclusively in my 4K intros. With patience and practice, choice "a" is vastly superior to choice b. ASSEMBLY LANGUAGE FOR EVER!
Tyler's code, on the other hand, is not well-written. I'm not talking about his style (no line breaks or indentaion), I'm talking about the instructions themselves. Any C complier could beat this code hands-down.
I see two reasonable courses of action here:
a.) Learn to program real assembly language.
b.) Write your "First3D.exe" in C.
I personally think assembly language rocks and use it exclusively in my 4K intros. With patience and practice, choice "a" is vastly superior to choice b. ASSEMBLY LANGUAGE FOR EVER!
I'm not even going to try and argue..
Try to push this retarded state of mind through in a professional environment. I'm telling you, you'll change or it's flat on your face in a week.
Duh :)
Try to push this retarded state of mind through in a professional environment. I'm telling you, you'll change or it's flat on your face in a week.
Duh :)
And hell yeah, I've applied some lighting fast assembly here and there in our projects. It's just that I know where to use it without losing efficiency.
You're just a blindfolded retard. AS IF you could only halfway consistently beat a compiler (and even IF you could, 99% of the time you'd be wasting resources).
Dumb fool :)
You're just a blindfolded retard. AS IF you could only halfway consistently beat a compiler (and even IF you could, 99% of the time you'd be wasting resources).
Dumb fool :)
BALFASZ
Hey ! This is my first win32/opengl program so I tried not to mess up with optimizations...
About "no-tabs-style" ? I think, tabs are killin' "assembler-style" at all... can you understand it , you crapy C-programmers :))))
Anyway, i'm already solve my problems (except perspective, some stuff with it :( )
About "no-tabs-style" ? I think, tabs are killin' "assembler-style" at all... can you understand it , you crapy C-programmers :))))
Anyway, i'm already solve my problems (except perspective, some stuff with it :( )
Real men code in machine language...
...on punch cards!
...on punch cards!
Yep :)
By the way. Does anybody know any demos written with Fasm ? :)
By the way. Does anybody know any demos written with Fasm ? :)
by the way, why is it interesting to know if a demo was written using fasm or nasm or tasm or masm? what is important that it's asm or c or pascal...
:)
:)
If it's Fasm, so I can ask demo "how to ?" and not to bother all of you... :)
Superplek:
Please allow me to clarify. When I work on a 4K or other size-critical production, writing in Assembly Language pays big dividends. I can usually tweak code in favor of the compressor, yielding anywhere from 10% to 40% improvement over MSVC. It may take about twice as long to write the code, but I am willing to spend that time as a coder if it means pushing the limits of what can be placed in 4K.
For regular productions, however, I work in standard C++. There is no reason to use assembly language if size or ultimate speed is not a concern. Most of the programs I make are done in C++. Even when I work on a 4K prod, I always prototype the routines in C first to debug and test them. Once I am satisfied that the basic routine works, I take the time to re-write in Assembly.
So, I am not a "blindfolded retard" as you claim. I select the appropriate tool for the given situation and use it. For size-critical code, Assembly language is that tool. For other work, C or C++ is the appropriate tool to use.
Tyler:
You can never have too many tools. It is in your best interests to learn as much as possible about as many different types of programming as possible. When the time comes to write a program, select the best one. If you know how to code proper assembly language, that is just another ace up your sleeve when writing small/fast programs. On the other hand, you should be familiar with C++ as a way to quickly develop code that is easy to debug and maintain.
In this particular case, writing your First3D.exe in C is an excellent choice. From your past productions, however, I see that you like to write small programs such as 256b. This is why I strongly recommend improving your assembly-language skills as well. The proper choice is not a or b, but both a and b.
Darn. Now I'm starting to sound like Optimus.
Please allow me to clarify. When I work on a 4K or other size-critical production, writing in Assembly Language pays big dividends. I can usually tweak code in favor of the compressor, yielding anywhere from 10% to 40% improvement over MSVC. It may take about twice as long to write the code, but I am willing to spend that time as a coder if it means pushing the limits of what can be placed in 4K.
For regular productions, however, I work in standard C++. There is no reason to use assembly language if size or ultimate speed is not a concern. Most of the programs I make are done in C++. Even when I work on a 4K prod, I always prototype the routines in C first to debug and test them. Once I am satisfied that the basic routine works, I take the time to re-write in Assembly.
So, I am not a "blindfolded retard" as you claim. I select the appropriate tool for the given situation and use it. For size-critical code, Assembly language is that tool. For other work, C or C++ is the appropriate tool to use.
Tyler:
You can never have too many tools. It is in your best interests to learn as much as possible about as many different types of programming as possible. When the time comes to write a program, select the best one. If you know how to code proper assembly language, that is just another ace up your sleeve when writing small/fast programs. On the other hand, you should be familiar with C++ as a way to quickly develop code that is easy to debug and maintain.
In this particular case, writing your First3D.exe in C is an excellent choice. From your past productions, however, I see that you like to write small programs such as 256b. This is why I strongly recommend improving your assembly-language skills as well. The proper choice is not a or b, but both a and b.
Darn. Now I'm starting to sound like Optimus.
s_tec: Word up, I'm taking my words back.
Superplek: Cool! Sorry for being so ambiguous at first about my choice of platforms.
On a side note, I've looked into Dempaja some more, and realize that it's actually more of an editor than an engine. I orignially thought that it was a way to make a production without coders, not a way for coders to let artists interactively edit effects. I'm cool with that.
/me retracts my stupid Demopaja bashing.
On a side note, I've looked into Dempaja some more, and realize that it's actually more of an editor than an engine. I orignially thought that it was a way to make a production without coders, not a way for coders to let artists interactively edit effects. I'm cool with that.
/me retracts my stupid Demopaja bashing.
Superplek: Cool!
plek taking his words back happens so seldom that people actually go "what? wow! cool! i don't believe it!" :)
plek taking his words back happens so seldom that people actually go "what? wow! cool! i don't believe it!" :)
s_tec: Common sense seems to be on your side, I'm happy to recognize that within this community :) And we're all a little ambiguous some times..
As for Demopaja, I think it can be a big productivity boost. Which is probably good.
Reed: I told you I'm not *that* evil :)
As for Demopaja, I think it can be a big productivity boost. Which is probably good.
Reed: I told you I'm not *that* evil :)
// you crapy C-programmers
my first language was Assembler and i used that
exclusive for 7 years.
my first language was Assembler and i used that
exclusive for 7 years.
But.... i never wrote my source in such a crappy way, hell, i'm sure you will have a hard time trying to understand what you have been doing when you look back at your sourcecode.
Yeah same here.. I've been looking angrily at C-compilers even until 4 years ago. Assembler only before that, but hell, I don't regret the transition :)
Plek did take back his words but he didn't apologise for the use of the term "dumb fool". APOLOGISE!
Hey there pete, chill out. Taking back words is about the same as apologising. After all, if the words are taken back, there is no longer anything to apologise about, is there? Besides, I don't really care. :)
hey there s_tec, get a sense of humour.
I'll hereby pass on all potential insults to Pete :)
s'plek is megaevilwordbacktaker!
i never wrote my source in such a crappy way
ultimate reason for not to opensource our projects :))
ultimate reason for not to opensource our projects :))
excuse me, but what does this have to do with opensource ?