On Thursday, 1 June 2017 at 12:00:45 UTC, Era Scarecrow wrote:
So why is the offset off by 14h (20 bytes)? It's not like we
need a to set a ptr first.
Go figure i probably found a bug...
Well as a side note a simple yet not happy workaround is making
a new array slice of the memory and th
On Tuesday, 23 May 2017 at 03:33:38 UTC, Era Scarecrow wrote:
From what I'm seeing, it should be 8, 0ch, 10h, then 14h, all
positive. I'm really scratching my head why I'm having this
issue...
What am i missing here?
More experiments and i think it comes down to static arrays.
The following
On Wednesday, 11 January 2017 at 17:32:35 UTC, Era Scarecrow
wrote:
Still I think I'll impliment my own version and then if it's
faster I'll submit it.
Decided I'd give my hand at writing a 'ScaledInt' which is
intended to basically allow any larger unsigned type. Coming
across some assembl
On Wednesday, 11 January 2017 at 15:39:49 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
On Wednesday, 11 January 2017 at 06:14:35 UTC, Era Scarecrow
wrote:
Suddenly reminds me some of the speedup assembly I was writing
for wideint, but seems I lost my code. too bad, the 128bit
multiply had sped up and the div
On Wednesday, 11 January 2017 at 06:14:35 UTC, Era Scarecrow
wrote:
Suddenly reminds me some of the speedup assembly I was writing
for wideint, but seems I lost my code. too bad, the 128bit
multiply had sped up and the division needed some work.
I'm a taker if you have some algorithm to reus
On Tuesday, 10 January 2017 at 10:41:54 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
don't forget to flag
asm pure nothrow {}
otherwise it's slow.
Suddenly reminds me some of the speedup assembly I was writing
for wideint, but seems I lost my code. too bad, the 128bit
multiply had sped up and the division needed
On Wednesday, 11 January 2017 at 00:11:50 UTC, Chris M wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 January 2017 at 13:13:17 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 January 2017 at 11:38:43 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 January 2017 at 10:41:54 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
don't forget to flag
asm pure nothrow
On Tuesday, 10 January 2017 at 13:13:17 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 January 2017 at 11:38:43 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 January 2017 at 10:41:54 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
don't forget to flag
asm pure nothrow {}
otherwise it's slow.
Why?
It's an empirical observatio
On Tuesday, 10 January 2017 at 13:13:17 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 January 2017 at 11:38:43 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 January 2017 at 10:41:54 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
don't forget to flag
asm pure nothrow {}
otherwise it's slow.
Why?
It's an empirical observatio
On Tuesday, 10 January 2017 at 11:38:43 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 January 2017 at 10:41:54 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
don't forget to flag
asm pure nothrow {}
otherwise it's slow.
Why?
It's an empirical observation. In september I tried to get why an
inline asm function was
On Tuesday, 10 January 2017 at 10:41:54 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
don't forget to flag
asm pure nothrow {}
otherwise it's slow.
Why?
On Monday, 9 January 2017 at 02:31:42 UTC, Chris M. wrote:
Right now I'm working on a project where I'm implementing a VM
in D. I'm on the rotate instructions, and realized I could
*almost* abstract the ror and rol instructions with the
following function
private void rot(string ins)(int *op1
On Monday, 9 January 2017 at 02:31:42 UTC, Chris M. wrote:
asm
{
mov EAX, tmp; // I'd also like to know if I could just
load *op1 directly into EAX
mov ECX, op2[EBP];
mixin(ins ~ " EAX, CL;"); // Issue here
mov tmp, EAX;
}
*op1 = tmp;
}
However,
On Monday, 9 January 2017 at 02:38:01 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Monday, 9 January 2017 at 02:31:42 UTC, Chris M. wrote:
[...]
Yes make the whole inline asm a mixin.
Awesome, got it working. Thanks to both replies.
On Monday, 9 January 2017 at 02:31:42 UTC, Chris M. wrote:
However, the inline assembler doesn't like me trying to do a
mixin.
yep. iasm is completely independent from other fronted, it has
it's own lexer, parser and so on. don't expect those things to
work. the only way is to mixin the whole
On Monday, 9 January 2017 at 02:31:42 UTC, Chris M. wrote:
Right now I'm working on a project where I'm implementing a VM
in D. I'm on the rotate instructions, and realized I could
*almost* abstract the ror and rol instructions with the
following function
private void rot(string ins)(int *op1
16 matches
Mail list logo
