Since they're determined by the order of sprites in a .BFT file,
they're best auto-generated by an enum as much as possible.
Part of P0074, funded by Myles.
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-.
"Yeah, let's do this real quick, how can this possibly be hard, it's
just MOVs and a few function calls"…
…except that these MOVs access quite a lot of data, which we now all
have to declare in the C world, hooray.
Once it came to midbosses and bosses, I just turned them into C structs
after all. Despite what I said in 260edd8… after all, the ASM world
doesn't care about the representation in the C world, so they don't
necessarily have to be the same.
Since these structs can't contain everything related to midbosses and
bosses (really, why did all those variables have to be spread out like
this, ZUN?), it also made for a nice occasion to continue the "stuff"
naming scheme, describing "an obviously incomplete collection of
variables related to a thing", first seen in 160d4eb.
Also, PROCDESC apparently is the only syntactically correct option to
declare an extern near proc?
Also, that `boss_phase_timed_out` variable only needs to be here
already because TCC enforces word alignment for the .data segment…
yeah, it's technically not related to this commit, but why waste time
working around it if we can just include that one variable.
Completes P0030, funded by zorg.
… yeah, I don't really like these ambiguous "mode" and "mode change"
variable names either, but what's the alternative? Something something
"sub-phase", to distinguish them from regular phases? Feels way too
early to decide on something more specific. And pretty much nothing I
could come up with right now would have made their inconsistent use any
clearer.
But I need to decide on *something* before moving on, so… eh, let's
just go with what uth05win chose.
Also, yeah, dealing with those 0xFE and 0xFD boss_phase constants some
other time 😛
Also, today in "Weird TASM crashes": Trailing commas at the end of
`public` lines…
Completes P0028, funded by zorg.
So apparently, this way of distorting a circle into an ellipse (?) by
adding a value to the angle for one of the two coordinates isn't
actually widely known in math and doesn't have a name. Fair enough.
Funded by -Tom-.
nmlgc