atoflt

[jj2007]

slowing down the compile time

I made a series of tests. A simple Windows GUI program of about 100 lines takes:

- about 460 milliseconds to assemble with a minimal set of includes and libraries
- about 460 milliseconds with a simple include \masm32\include\masm32rt.inc
- about 520 milliseconds with include \masm32\MasmBasic\MasmBasic.inc

So the "slowdown" is zero milliseconds for masm32rt.inc and a whopping 60 milliseconds for the MasmBasic library (with currently 520 additional commands)

[jimg]

Yes, of course my feelings were from 15 or more years ago hardware.  But I'm still a minimalist at heart :)

[NoCforMe]

Well, then you'd better remember to include all those little bits and pieces.

15 years ago I would've agreed with you. I find as I get older that I want the machine to remember more and me to have to remember less stuff.

[Vortex]

Hello,

Here is a quick _strtoui64 example :

Code Select Expand

include     \masm32\include\masm32rt.inc
includelib  ucrt.lib

_strtoui64  PROTO C :DWORD,:DWORD,:DWORD

.data

str1        db '65536',0
str2        db 'Value returned by'
            db '_strtoui64 : %u',0

.data?

.code

start:

    invoke  _strtoui64,ADDR str1,\
            0,10

    invoke  crt_printf,ADDR str2,eax

    invoke  ExitProcess,0

END start


[jimg]

Thanks erol.

I'm not clear on the difference between strtoui64 and strtoull, that is I'm not sure what the difference between the output, "unsigned __int64"  and  "unsigned long long" is, and which one I should use when.

[TimoVJL]

Thanks erol.

I'm not clear on the difference between strtoui64 and strtoull, that is I'm not sure what the difference between the output, "unsigned __int64"  and  "unsigned long long" is, and which one I should use when.

Both means same, 64bits long and long long is from newer standard C99 and __int64 is not standard C msvc private type.

[jimg]

So it doesn't matter which one I use.  I'm not chunking vast amounts of data, so no need to run timing tests between the two.