`cPtrSize` is simply the wrong constant for calculating parameter
offsets on the stack, because it corresponds to the memory model's
default distance, not the function's distance. Luckily, ARG has a
RETURNS clause, and if you declare all parameters in there, ARG won't
emit that pesky and unnecessary `ENTER 0, 0` instruction. Big discovery
right there!
Sadly, ARG is unusable for ZUN's silly functions that keep the base
pointer in BX. TASM declares the resulting equates as `[BP+offset]`,
and it's apparently impossible to only get `offset` out of such an
equate later.
So, rather than staying with numbers, let's reimplement ARG for these
functions instead. This way, we can even abstract away the stack clear
size for the `RET` instructions.
It's a bit rough around the edges though, forcing you to explicitly
specify the function distance, and to pass the parameters in reverse
order compared to the C declaration (thankfully, all of these use the
PASCAL calling convention). It also doesn't work with more complex
types yet. But certainly better than numbers.
Part of P0134, funded by [Anonymous].
Whew, time to look at every `int` variable we ever declared! The best
moment to do this would have been a year ago, but well, better late
than never. No need to communicate that in comments anymore.
These shouldn't be used for widths, heights, or sprite-space
coordinates. Maybe we'll cover that another time, this commit is
already large enough.
Part of P0111, funded by [Anonymous] and Blue Bolt.
I tried `brge` for the latter, but that had *the* most horrible
ergonomics, and I misspelled it as `bgre` 100% of the times I typed it
manually. Turns out that `dots` is also consistent with master.lib's
naming scheme, leaving `planar` to *actually* refer to types storing
multiple planes worth of pixels. These types are showing up more and
more, and deserve something better than their previous long-winded and
misleading name.
Part of P0081, funded by Ember2528.
Which *looks* like a master.lib function, but only because ZUN adapted
his own micro-optimized super_roll_put_tiny() for 32×32. Good thing we
covered that one first!
Part of P0073, funded by [Anonymous] and -Tom-.
So, master.lib has:
• super_put_tiny() for tiny-format 16×n sprites
• super_roll_put_tiny() for vertically wrapped tiny-format 16×16
sprites
• super_put_tiny_small() for tiny-format 8×n sprites
• yet *no* super_roll_put_tiny_small() function
And now we have ZUN adding micro-optimized versions of:
1) vertically-wrapped tiny-format 16×16, clearly based on master.lib's
super_roll_put_tiny(), RE'd in 35f9bd7
2) vertically-wrapped tiny-format 32×32
3) vertically-wrapped non-tiny monochrome 16×16 (TH05 only)
Conclusion: Even though 1) does duplicate a master.lib function, trying
to continue following master.lib's inconsistent naming convention only
leads to more confusion here. master.lib also already designates the _8
suffix to mean "x will be byte-aligned, ⌊x/8⌋*8"…
So let's:
• spell out both coordinates of the sprite size directly in the
function
• keep the z_ prefix to encode ZUN's optimized calling convention
(left/top coordinates in registers, ES already set to the beginning
of a VRAM plane, GRCG already on) for all of these, not just 1).
• and prefix the actual functions with _raw, since C land will want
to handle the coordinate parameter registers in a macro.
Part of P0073, funded by [Anonymous] and -Tom-.
nmlgc