rc stub for running Pelle's resource compiler.

[hutch--]

This is a small app that makes it easier to use Pelle's PORC resource compiler without having to change anything in the MASM32 installation. You need to copy PORC.EXE and PORC.DLL to the BIN directory then rename the old Microsoft RC then place this file RC.EXE in the BIN directory and when you build an app in masm32, it will use PORC instead of RC.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[BlackVortex]

Works great with latest porc version 5.0.1 , just tried.

But porc makes my exe's rsrc section 11kb bigger !!!    :dazzled: :dazzled: :dazzled: :dazzled: :dazzled: :dazzled:
(I just have an icon and some raw data)

Also, porc doesn't understand ";" as a commented line ? It gave me an error and I had to delete the commented line.
Am I missing something or is this just a case of plain ol' failure ?

Or is there a /notsuck commandline option that I should have used ?   :green2

[hutch--]

Resource compiler use C/C++ commenting. try that. As far as the increase in size, I don't know what is happening there, you should only get the resource size rounded up to the next 512 byte boundary.

[BlackVortex]

Resource compiler use C/C++ commenting. try that. As far as the increase in size, I don't know what is happening there, you should only get the resource size rounded up to the next 512 byte boundary.

No, it's 11 kbs of difference. I hexedited the rsrc section and saw that it wasn't just blank space. I even rared the two exes to make sure, and they are 3kbs different in size compressed. So there's some garbage there. I guess I should have compared the .res files too.

Anyway, I stay away from any tool that doesn't comply to MS standards/syntax. But what do you suggest is a true alternative for rc.exe ? Maybe just a newer version of rc.exe ?

[BlackVortex]

Well, I figured out why it becomes bigger. There was another commented line in my rc. Well, it was commented for MS's link but not for POSrc. So it included that file resource.

No comment (pun intended)


;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;          :(       ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

[Mark Jones]

In my experience, the PO* series of tools are all high-quality tools, which meet or exceed both MS specs and performance.

[BlackVortex]

In my experience, the PO* series of tools are all high-quality tools, which meet or exceed both MS specs and performance.

Don't know about the linker but I'm not using that assembler in a milliopn years. Check this thread:
http://forum.pellesc.de/index.php?topic=2372.0

Ridiculous.

I'm using jwasm as an assembler, and I want a masm-compatible linker  :-)
Or just tell me which version of MS's link.exe is the elitest, plz.   :green2

[hutch--]

BlackVortex,

You shold have a look at Pelle's tool set, reliable, very up to date specification wise and they come at the right price. I have been using Pelle's linker for years and never had a problem, it is more compatible than the old MS linker in masm32.

[Mark Jones]

Performing a search here for "polink smaller":

http://www.masm32.com/board/index.php?topic=4071.0

There are several such threads praising polink. But in any case, linker choice is always personal preference. :U

[GregL]

BlackVortex,

Pelle's C, POASM, POLINK etc. are very good. They are highly regarded around here. You should take a closer look at POASM before dismissing it. Like Pelle says "POASM is not MASM", it's not identical to MASM.

[Vortex]

BlackVortex,

Poasm, Polink, Polib and the other Pelles tools are mature products compatible with MS development tools. Pelle maintains his tools regularly and he fixes the reported bugs.

If it's possible, could you send here your executable ( with source codes ) which has a large resource section?

[BlackVortex]

BlackVortex,

Poasm, Polink, Polib and the other Pelles tools are mature products compatible with MS development tools. Pelle maintains his tools regularly and he fixes the reported bugs.

If it's possible, could you send here your executable ( with source codes ) which has a large resource section?

1) It was due to a commented line ... not being commented, so an additional resource was being included,lol. I don't need weirdness like this, isn't the rc format a specification of MS ? Why does porc do its own thing ?

2) About poasm, that thread scared me, I mean inserting ret in my code in the end of procs because it thinks I forgot about it. Big nono. Nononononono .... just assemble what I give you or give out a warning. Silently changing my code makes baby jesus cry.
Anyway, I use the jwasm assembler which is really cool.

3) Well, I did some tests with polink some weeks ago and decided to keep it. I've been using it since. I guess there isn't a better alternative.

Thanks for all the responses !!!