You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As I was going through with #208 pull request for XAPI symbol group inspection for parameters... I recently discovered both GetTypeInformation_4 and GetTypeInformation_8 symbols are not standard call functions. Instead they are fastcall functions. So, the parameters are stored in registers instead of onto stack. The pull request doesn't supplied registers onto symbol string for non-LTCG libraries are static generated. A decision will need to be made how to handle this type of situation. Other symbols so far doesn't have this type of conflict at this time.
I tried to look up for the original review remark in Cxbx-Reloaded repository twice but fail to find it again. I'm leaving this open until able to find the original review remark discussion to be link here. Plus to make further decision after re-review the review remark discussion and possible permanent solution for this problem.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
As I was going through with #208 pull request for XAPI symbol group inspection for parameters... I recently discovered both GetTypeInformation_4 and GetTypeInformation_8 symbols are not standard call functions. Instead they are fastcall functions. So, the parameters are stored in registers instead of onto stack. The pull request doesn't supplied registers onto symbol string for non-LTCG libraries are static generated. A decision will need to be made how to handle this type of situation. Other symbols so far doesn't have this type of conflict at this time.
I tried to look up for the original review remark in Cxbx-Reloaded repository twice but fail to find it again. I'm leaving this open until able to find the original review remark discussion to be link here. Plus to make further decision after re-review the review remark discussion and possible permanent solution for this problem.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: