View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
ViolaSteve
Joined: 23 Aug 2024 Posts: 2
|
Posted: Fri Aug 23, 2024 6:53 pm Post subject: 64 bit conversion to .NET |
|
|
Converted W32 to 64 bit with little difficulty. But then conversion to .NET has taken longer to achieve.
Running the EXE displays the console window and then stops. Using the /WINDOWS link option removes this console.
My FTN95 code includes WINIO@ and other Clearwin functions. I am lead to believe I must use .NET user interface calls.
Eventually, I will want to experiment with multi-threading. For now, I just want prove my original code and be able to go thru the I/O on the interface screens built with WINIO@
What are these .NET interface calls ? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DanRRight
Joined: 10 Mar 2008 Posts: 2865 Location: South Pole, Antarctica
|
Posted: Sat Aug 24, 2024 9:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I do not use NET, but probably useful will be couple multithreading examples for NET which I tested before. One was nice graphical demo example made by Silverfrost itself and published together with their very handy Clearwin/NET/OpenGL demos ( as a prototypes i use them all how good they were) , and another was mine, published here dozen years ago which extremely surprised me because it gave the acceleration much more than just the number of processor cores - additionally up to the factor of 2 if i remember correctly, i had 4 cores processor at that time but the acceleration was 7-8 and that was floating point acceleration not just integer - till now I have not resolved what was the reason for that miracle. May be you will eventually find the clue here. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ViolaSteve
Joined: 23 Aug 2024 Posts: 2
|
Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2024 10:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks DRR. My initial problem was to get a .NET EXE built which didn't take too long in the end. But to then get it running meant realising that I should use a listfile and name the individual routine names rather than *.dbk in a command line approach. More examples could have helped here. So, actually creating a .NET from 32 bit has actually proved fairly straight forward without too much changing of code; essentially, introducing integer(7) where required.
Anyway, I have now hit a JIT limitation problem and suspect the amount of code/data (for the named routine) has blown the compiler. This will need investigating.
One day, I might get to playing with multi-threading. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|