Hi!
20-Ноя-2004 20:50 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bart Oldeman) wrote to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>> troubles, like was issued with RTL-multiplcation functions from OW.
BO> That was a different problem. Watcom generated NEAR calls to these
BO> functions. Relocation wouldn't help. This point is moot now with one
On Sat, 20 Nov 2004, Arkady V.Belousov wrote:
> Yes, and then now may be reduced code duplication in asmsupt.asm (which
> generated both for transient and resident portion).
only for Borland C. For Watcom they are not duplicated (only one CS:
there). And anyway it's only a small amount of co
Hi!
20-Ноя-2004 18:54 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bart Oldeman) wrote to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>> Hm. I think for simplicity and safety, exeflat should itself move
>> relocation table from executable's header inside executable itself, so that
>> it may be reused by MoveKernel(). This allows to eliminate
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, Arkady V.Belousov wrote:
> Of course, qsort() if very fast algo (except some specific cases, when
> it is O(N^2)), but why to do _any_ extra action, when unnecessary? :)
> Especially, I suggest, (most) linkers do own sorting anyway?
I think even bubble sort would be fast
Hi!
18-Ноя-2004 11:24 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (tom ehlert) wrote to "Arkady V.Belousov"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
te> And why not leave *existing* code as is - without wasting mental and
te> ethernet bandwidth on it ?
This is not (yet) existing, this is _new_ code.
>> Especially, I suggest, (most) li
Hello Arkady,
>>> Small optimization: because BC doesn't knows, that exit() doesn't
BO>> I don't think optimizing exeflat.exe's size is very important though ;)
> Sure. :) But why not make more optimal code from scratch in any case,
> without thinking "will this code often used"?
And wh
Hi!
18-Ноя-2004 21:21 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bart Oldeman) wrote to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>> Small optimization: because BC doesn't knows, that exit() doesn't
BO> I don't think optimizing exeflat.exe's size is very important though ;)
Sure. :) But why not make more optimal code from scratch i
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, Arkady V.Belousov wrote:
> Small optimization: because BC doesn't knows, that exit() doesn't
> returns, better to insert explicit "return 0;" after exit() or return error
> code through return (remaining error handling for main()). For BC, this
> allows to join common tai
Hi!
17-Ноя-2004 18:01 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Luchezar Georgiev) wrote to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
LG> +++ exeflat.c 17 Nov 2004 18:01:54 - 1.9.2.4
LG> +int exeflat(int UPX, const char *srcfile, const char *dstfile,
LG> +const char *start, short *silentSegments, short silentcount)
