C++ Problem

I have a problem in this function, on the red line:

Code:

---

void CreateDivTable()
{
  DivTbl[0] = 0x7fffffff;
  DivTbl[1] = 0x7fffffff;
  DivTbl[2] = 0x7fffffff;
  for( int i = 3; i < 10240; i++ )
    DivTbl[i] = (int) ( float(0x100000000 )/ i);

  for (int y=0; y<32; y++)
  for (int x=0; x<32; x++)
    RandomMap[y][x] = rand()%1024;
}

---

Here's the declaration of DivTbl:

Code:

---

_EXTORNOT  int    DivTbl[10240];

---

The error states that:

"integer constant is too large for 'long' type" on the red line, but changing the variable type (To something larger, like long long) has no effect.

Help plz?

Heh nvm.

Had one too many zeros. (0x100000000)

Yeah, that's what I was going to suggest.

That, or this: :cookiemonster:

Both are the solution, I'm pretty sure.

New problem:

Code:

---

void Audio_MixSound(int DestAddr, int SrcAddr, int MixLen, int LVolume, int RVolume)
{
_asm {
      mov      edi, DestAddr
      mov      ecx, MixLen
      mov      esi, SrcAddr
    }

SOUND_CYCLE :

_asm {
      movsx    eax, word ptr [esi]
      imul    LVolume
      sar      eax, 16
      mov      bx, word ptr [edi]

      add      ax, bx
      jo      LEFT_CHECK_OVERFLOW
      mov      word ptr [edi], ax
      jmp      CYCLE_RIGHT
 }
LEFT_CHECK_OVERFLOW :
__asm {
      cmp      bx, 0
      js      LEFT_MAX_NEGATIVE
      mov      ax, 32767
      mov      word ptr [edi], ax
      jmp      CYCLE_RIGHT
}
LEFT_MAX_NEGATIVE :
__asm  mov      word ptr [edi], -32767




CYCLE_RIGHT :
__asm {
      movsx    eax, word ptr [esi]
      imul    dword ptr RVolume
      sar      eax, 16
      mov      bx, word ptr [edi+2]

      add      ax, bx
      jo      RIGHT_CHECK_OVERFLOW
      mov      word ptr [edi+2], ax
      jmp      CYCLE_CONTINUE
}
RIGHT_CHECK_OVERFLOW :
__asm {
      cmp      bx, 0
      js      RIGHT_MAX_NEGATIVE
      mov      word ptr [edi+2], 32767
      jmp      CYCLE_CONTINUE
}
RIGHT_MAX_NEGATIVE :
__asm  mov      word ptr [edi+2], -32767

CYCLE_CONTINUE :
__asm {
      add      edi, 4
      add      esi, 2
      dec      ecx
      jnz      SOUND_CYCLE
}

---

My compiler (MinGW) doesn't recognize _asm; What linker/ compiler command do I need for this...?

the GCC (including MinGW & Cygwin on Windows) uses the AT&T (UNIX) assembly format
while MS uses the Intel format

http://www.ibiblio.org/gferg/ldp/GCC...-HOWTO.html#s4

btw,
any particular reason you're using inline assembly?

Oh well shit.

I'm not going to re-write 3000 Assembly functions!

I'll use the compiler the code was originally used with then... :|

I think GNU is the standard. I know that you can do _asm with GNU.

Also, are you doing command line compilation? I think you have to add a whole ton of crap to the make to do inline assembly.

Also, maybe it's different for your compiler, but I always use references for parameters in inline assembly. I don't remember if you need to do that with GNU, I know one of them required you to do that.

Code:

---

mov      edi, [DestAddr]
      mov      ecx, [MixLen]
      mov      esi, [SrcAddr]

---

Why are you using your own sound routines? It might be easier to use OpenAL :P

So I can or I can't keep the functions as-is?

I didn't write the Assembly code-- This is apart of a game enginge I'm editing and adding to.

I would use OpenAL for a game, that way you are guaranteed that it will work.

3000 audio commands in asm? What is the name of this engine that you're working on, it sounds really big.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

So I can or I can't keep the functions as-is?

---

you cannot use Intel style assembly with GCC

I believe there are some pre-processor macros around to convert between the two syntaxes, but I have near zero experience with assembly inside C++

Yes you can :P I forget how though, some type of compiler flags. Try

Code:

---

-xchip=pentium5

---

I' think that's actually something else, but there is a similar flag for the asm. I don't do command line, my IDE takes care of that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Yes you can :P

---

you're right,
I just googled it

Code:

---

gcc -o my_program -masm=intel my_program.c

---

I find intel asm soooo much easier than the unix style one. How do people read that junk?

You can do misp asm inline too if you are on a PPC computer like me :P

I like to think I'm a fairly competent programmer
but I draw the line at assembly

now, I've never done anything game orientated
I'm primarily database and web server middleware

but seriously,
does DIY assembly *really* make that much of a difference?
(with all it's portability & bug pitfalls and show-stoppers)

maybe it's cause I change my mind too often
A minor re-jig to C code vs. scraping and re-writing pages of assembly

anyway....

Ausome, now I don't have to phuck around with other compilers!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ynot

does DIY assembly *really* make that much of a difference?

---

Assembly code is INSANELY fast. It also has a better memory footprint. I've never had a compiler make better asm than me (for small routines obviously.) Compilers are very liberal with the stack (liveliness analysis isn't very good), when I do something in asm I try to use the stack as little as possible, that usually means moving parts of the code around, which compilers have a hard time doing.

I do graphics and when doing extensions for OpenGL or shaders, you have to use assembly because C just isn't fast enough, even with the 3 pass optimizer turned on.

Okay, it worked, but it's taking forever to compile :?

Actually, it didn't work.

It just took forever and gave me 5x the errors...

Must be your C++ code, asm should be really fast to compiler. What other flags did you set, are you doing multiple passes?

As for your errors: see post above about referencing with asm.

None and no.

I just put gcc -o my_program -masm=intel my_program.c twice for the two (huge) files that use inline assembly.

It still doesn't recognize __asm { }

I see some errors in the programmer, are you sure this program worked once?

Code:

---

mov bx, word ptr [edi]

---

Pointers are 64-bit, bx is 16-bit :?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

It still doesn't recognize __asm { }

---

GCC accepts either asm or _asm_. You need either no underscores or two.

Oh okay.

Well I sure hope it did as it's a game engine for a video game that was once produced :?

A few other people have managed to get it working, but I have limited contact with them.

I think most games are written in .NET which means a M$ compiler. I'm not sure if you can get that for free.