Martial Code's DX win apps has inspired me to rewrite mine(with me unfortunatly staying up way to late when I have to work tommorrow(now 3:45 AM))
Part of my implamentatio requires? a writeable code section. This is what I'm using:
That should make all the code in there writeable right? I've been having some access problems(maybe I need to rebuild)
BTW: In a few days(after I clean up the code, and test it), I will post a source that lets you use directx with invoke , not dxinvoke or ddinvoke. Nope, good ol invoke.
Part of my implamentatio requires? a writeable code section. This is what I'm using:
_TEXT SEGMENT PUBLIC USE32 'CODE'
_TEXT ENDS
_DATA SEGMENT PUBLIC USE32 'DATA'
_DATA ENDS
_TEXT SEGMENT
...code... (here)
_TEXT ENDS
That should make all the code in there writeable right? I've been having some access problems(maybe I need to rebuild)
BTW: In a few days(after I clean up the code, and test it), I will post a source that lets you use directx with invoke , not dxinvoke or ddinvoke. Nope, good ol invoke.
As far as I'm using segment directives, I haven't been able to successfully make the code section writeable(.asm code controlled) but you can specify this parameter during linking.
/section:.text,rwe
r = read
w =write
e = execute
I could be wrong with the segment directive`s capabilities. :o
/section:.text,rwe
r = read
w =write
e = execute
I could be wrong with the segment directive`s capabilities. :o
Thanks. This extened segment directives are not well(or easily understadably) documented IMO.
My code seems to be working now. But I think I'll try your method just to be sure.
Using these directives seems to remove some bothersome "errors" that come from using .code et al...
My code seems to be working now. But I think I'll try your method just to be sure.
Using these directives seems to remove some bothersome "errors" that come from using .code et al...