| ??? 02/18/08 20:23 Read: times |
#151045 - FAT in assembly Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Why mess? Because there are so many buffers (directory sector buffer, data sector buffer, file allocation table sector buffer) and pointers (directory offset, read/write offset within the data sector and within the overall file), etc. Of course I'm not saying it can't be done. I did it--at least the reading aspect. But it'd be orders of magnitude cleaner--and more readable--in 'C'. Regards, Craig Steiner |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| File Handling using 8 bit Uc | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Of course it's possible ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Yes, of course - but in assembler? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Agreed | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| why mess? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| FAT in assembly | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| How did FAT come up? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| FATs popularity is largely given by... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Craig cited it as an example | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I disagree | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Asm vs. C | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| registers??? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Difference is... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Actually, that was me | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Oops | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| If you're not determined to use FAT12 or 16 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Conclusion? | 01/01/70 00:00 |