> hutch--, how exactly was your misinformation helpful?

i can imagine it was helpful for others to realize that he doesn't know what he's talking about.
Posted on 2005-01-17 12:34:27 by japheth
Btw, while "call memcpy" should be just fine from inline assembly, it seems that this will not work when intrinsic functions are enabled! Without intrinsics (ie, no optimization flags), "call memcpy" assembles just fine. With intrinsics, I get something like:

error C2420: 'memcpy' : illegal symbol in first operand
error C2415: improper operand type


Thanks to Jibz for noticing this :)
Posted on 2005-01-17 17:53:28 by f0dder
It seems this pile of crap is heading for the stupidity forum REAL FAST so lets address some of this nonsense.

fodda

hutch--, how exactly was your misinformation helpful?

Both the C runtimes and API functions will probably be off the pace as they usually have higher overhead with SEH and similar.


That irritating habit of telling the truth based on having seen C runtimes since you were wearing napkins. Some are good, some are bad, occasionally some are excellent while some are terrible and it generally comes from them being out of date and compliant to ANSI 89/99 instead of the manufacturers technical data.

jafeth

> hutch--, how exactly was your misinformation helpful?

i can imagine it was helpful for others to realize that he doesn't know what he's talking about.


Its truly a brave man who will defend the standard C runtimes over the last 20 years. Short map for you. MSC 6 (1990) runtimes for DOS were OK but a bit oversized. MSC 7 (1992) was an appalling pile of sh*t that cost me a fortune and was broken bloated code. VC1 (1994) hit the big time with very good C runtimes that were smaller and faster than any of the earlier versions but had absolute garbage MFC C++ runtimes. Very variable quality since. As late as 2000 you had ancient slow crap with SCAS style code in some C runtimes.

Solution to the problem

Download JIBZ's C runtime replacement and try writing some REAL C code and start writing some of your OWN C runtimes in MASM. :-D
Posted on 2005-01-17 18:23:46 by hutch--
> Short map for you

Thank you very much indeed, but I know MS C compilers since C 5.1 (1988) pretty good (and wrote my first win16 program in 1989 for windows 2.x).

> start writing some of your OWN C runtimes in MASM

did this 9 years ago and still use it when size matters.
Posted on 2005-01-18 00:17:06 by japheth