This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: But it is cygwin related.

On 2013-04-04 09:15, Earnie Boyd wrote:
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Frank Farance wrote:

I haven't posted in a long while, but the question seems reasonable and
relevant to cygwin.  If one were writing assembler code to be compatible
with cygwin, one would need the answer to the question originally posed.  I
don't see this as a question about win32 APIs (which might be answered by
your link above), it is a compatibility question ... certainly, we would
have thought about it this way when writing a mix of C and assembler code 40
years ago on UNIX systems.

The OP was related to "How to program".  From we have


Thanks for the response.  Let me try to say it in a different way that, I hope, makes it a bit clearer.  Let's say there are two programs "A" and "B".  When I run "A", it performs some calculations and then "prints" the result.  For example:

	int i,sum;

	sum = 0;
	for ( i = 0 ; i < 10000 ; i++ )
		sum += i;
	printf("sum is %d\n",sum);

So running A produces (say):

$ A
sum is 49995000

Now, for whatever reason, a different set of calculations are needed and assembler is the best software engineering solution (for whatever reason).  As a programmer, I can think of several ways that will cause a visual image to appear on the screen with the result, but some of them will not be compatible with B with the pipeline:

# Note: B has similar functionality as the "wc" program
$ A | B

In early UNIX days, this kind of compatibility among assembler and C code was well understood.  However in a Windows environment, this might not be obvious, and given all the experience and knowledge gained over the years, it would be helpful to transform this tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge (for sharing with others, ya know), rather than much trial and error via experimentation.

So when I google:

cygwin compatibility with assembler code

The mail archives point me to my *own* message above that you have responded to (ha!).  If I've missed an article that answers the question above (without using "printf" and the other baggage), then please let me know.  Thanks.


Frank Farance, Farance Inc.    T: +1 212 486 4700   M: +1 917 751 2900
Standards/Products/Services for Information/Communication Technologies

Problem reports:
Unsubscribe info:

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]