In a message dated 31/03/04 08:37:03 GMT Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > I'd go for the simple and direct window definition in normal, QMAC style > Assembler. > > Most of the rest will be handled by the assembler programmer anyway. > > Wolfgang > A simple window definition in assembly language format is, I suppose, just a set of DC instructions. However, the programmer then has to work out the amount of space needed for the working definition. This is automatically done for a programmer who uses the QMAC or GWASS macros, but that requires the window definition to be set up as a set of calls to macros, not as a set of DC instructions. Apart from the question of size there is the need to link assembler routines to the parts of the window definition which need hit routines and so on. I would think the links to hit routines would have to be left blank. I assume that the simple DC approach would be satisfactory - it would certainly be easier to implement. George _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List
