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