Here is some free source: ( I didnt find anything useful under the board search, so I looked it up and hacked out some soure )

[b]IF uMsg == WM_MOUSEWHEEL[/b]
mov edx, wParam
sar edx, 16
.if( SDWORD PTR edx > 0)
PrintText "Move Positive Wheel (Wheel UP)"
shr edx, 3
neg edx
and edx, 0fh
PrintDec edx

PrintText "Move Negative Wheel (Wheel DOwn)"
shr edx, 3
and edx, 0fh
PrintDec edx


The value of EDX is either case is the # of whell "clicks" that happened. The highest i was able to reach was 5 in one message. :)

Hope you can use it...
Posted on 2002-05-03 04:50:33 by NaN
.if( SDWORD PTR edx > 0)

SDWORD a Typo?

Interesting code tho, NaN

Posted on 2002-05-03 08:04:26 by JamesE
SDWORD = Signed DWORD, to make use of the signed Jcc. Yeah,
masm *is* a typed assembler :).
Posted on 2002-05-03 08:07:34 by f0dder
Posted on 2002-05-03 14:50:09 by NaN
Why the LOL? Masm *is* a typed assembler. No more, no less.
Posted on 2002-05-03 19:04:24 by f0dder
Wow I didn't know that. I always just figured out the signed jumps on my own. Learn somethin' new everyday here. ;)

Then again I'm not too big on macros. I should start.
Posted on 2002-05-03 19:53:42 by iblis
f0dder, im not laughing at your reasons. I just find it funny how you like to make every detail so assured. (not to be offending here).

It reminds me of The Achilles Paradox story. The version im thinking of is twisted a bit from the true story. A mathematician and an engineer are struggling to cross the dance floor to get the girl. As the paradox rules state, you can only cross half the distance that remains each turn.

Where i chuckle is, when the mathematician disappointedly prooves "he will NEVER get the girl!", the engineer says... "eh, close enough" ;)

Compiler/assembler? .... eh, close enough ;)

However, im not trying to mock you, i do respect your reasons for their differences. :alright:

Posted on 2002-05-03 21:53:10 by NaN
NaN, hadn't heard that variation before - but it's a good one ;).
And btw in that story, I'm more the engineer than the mathematician.

But yeah, there are some things I might be a bit 'anal' about...
not much stuff in real life, but quite some things that are computer
related. I think one ought to use the correct terms whe one can.
Sometimes it doesn't matter all too much and is mostly a matter of
taste - like choosing whether to call masm a compiler or assembler.
While it *is* an assembler, it *does* do some more highlevel stuff.
But since it's still pretty wysiwyg and doesn't handle "very" highlevel
stuff, I think 'assembler' is the best word, even if it's a typed,
structured, macroized assembler. So, why does it matter? Because if
we keep calling masm an assembler, it's a bit easier figuring out wtf
people mean. If I say 'assembler' I mean something more or less lowlevel
with a lot of control, if I say compiler I mean something more highlevel
that (usually) gets the job done faster.

Other times, it matters a lot more. Like the difference between
"encoded" and "encrypted" (re the MP3 thread). "encrypted" means that
you're scrambling data with the purpose of making it unavailable to
unauthorized people (or something like that - but it involves
cryptographic methods). "encoding", in this context, means representing
data in a different way. You *encode* sound data in the MP3 format
to gain space saving. All compression is a form of encoding (where
'compression' is a nice and specific word, which when used should inform
everybody that you're encoding with the purpose of saving space). Other
encodings would be BASE64 (to represent binary data in a 7bit ascii),
or FFT which does... ummm, stuff ;).

My point? Let's try not to FUBAR definitions - if we have the same
definitions, we can understand eachother a lot better.
Posted on 2002-05-04 01:10:26 by f0dder
Agreed :)

Just one question tho, is fair to say Encoding is mealy PUBLIC encryption. From you definition, if i didnt know it was BASE64, it would be Encrypted. If i did know it was BASE64, it would be encoded.

Either way, numbers are getting crunched and mangled by some Algorithm. ?? ;)

PS: I dont find you anal :cool:
Posted on 2002-05-04 04:51:19 by NaN
Heh, you might be able to argue that from my definitions... but the
definitions in the above post of course weren't complete, and I'm
not a native english speaker yadda yadda etc :).
Posted on 2002-05-04 05:49:51 by f0dder
Agreed, Im just play'in with you a bit ;)

Thanks for the converstation :)

Posted on 2002-05-04 11:46:18 by NaN