This is the too many fixups bug?! If so that's great news. So is it any slower now with things not in ASM?
--bb On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Walter Bright <newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote: > Optlink is written entirely in rather impenetrable assembler code, and is > resistant to understanding and modification. Hence, over the last few months > I've been very slowly converting it to C, function by function. > > One might ask, why not convert it to D? The answer is that I don't have a > good test suite for optlink, so I have to be very very careful to not make a > mistake in the translation. That means do one function at a time, rebuild, > and retest, which means the compiled C code has to match the segment, naming > and calling conventions used in optlink. I made a custom version of the dmc > compiler to do this. Also, C can be made to work without any runtime library > support at all, and since optlink does not use the C runtime library, this > is useful. > > Once it is in C and working, it will be trivial to translate it to D and > start rewriting it. > > Anyhow, during this process I stumbled upon what the problem was. Optlink > was apparently trying to account for some Borland obscure extension to the > OMF. Remove this, and it works, although presumably it will no longer link > Borland object files (who cares!). > > The fix will go out in the next update, if you need it sooner please email > me. >