RE: [AD] Header splitup.

["Vincent Penquerc'h" <Vincent.Penquerch@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Title: RE: [AD] Header splitup.

> No. If you take a look at asm.inl, you'll see that it is only
> a wrapper for
> the platform-dependent asm file, which are located in the platform/
> directory.

That is right. But it won't include anything if no asm version of the
routines are available for the current platform, so...
What I don't understand is that if no asm version of, say, bmp_read_line,
is available for BC++, then it ought to define them in alconfig.h (I
think, it might be another header). Which should be included where
appropriate to be defined whenever used.

> IMHO gfxasm.inl and mathasm.inl are useless because you can't
> include them
> without including *each time* gfx.inl and fmaths.inl
> (respectively) before.
> This oversight broke the compilation under BC++.

That is on purpose. They are asm versions of stuff that should be defined
in, eg, gfx.inl or fmaths.inl. On second thought, I think it would be
better to include a fallback C version of these routines in gfx.inl and
fmaths.inl, if no asm version is available for a particular platform.

Where would you put the asm version of the routines that currently are
in gfxasm.inl ? They must be somewhere...

Sorry for being slow to understand :)

--
Vincent Penquerc'h