The Lounge is rated Safe For Work. If you're about to post something inappropriate for a shared office environment, then don't post it. No ads, no abuse, and no programming questions. Trolling, (political, climate, religious or whatever) will result in your account being removed.
I'll second the suggestion to use WSL - I do cross-platform (Linux/Windows) C++ development & use a Windows 10 laptop with a WSL Ubuntu 18.04 installation, and I wouldn't want to work any other way. I use Ubuntu bash as my main shell. I can invoke both Windows and Linux executables from that shell. I use Visual Studio Code as my editor, and can either interact with Windows tools, or Linux ones if I use the Remote-WSL extension.
If you use WSL1, you're using the Windows kernel through a translation layer, while WSL2 uses a lightweight VM with a Linux kernel - oh, and you can switch between WSL1 and 2 at will... In either case, your userspace experience should be pretty much the same...
Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p
Ugh! I will keep your suggestion on the back burner, but quite frankly, I will lie if I tell you I understood every word you wrote. Note: The problem is my comprehension, not your suggestion! I just have to read your posting a few more times.
And: I have already downloaded the iso for Ubuntu (version 19 something). So I am ready to go the Ubuntu route if needed.
Try to take a look at this book "Assembly Language for x86 Processors", http://kipirvine.com/asm/ that is Windows and Visual Studio based textbook. Although it titled as x86 (32-bit) because of its history reason, it actually gives 64-bit assembly description almost at each chapter end. You also can find author's x64 libraries and practice 64-bit programming with VS. I am teaching ASM with this book for years and think it really a nice learning environment there.
I started a long time ago with 8048, 8080, TMS9900 and even DSP assembler.
Few years ago, I was doing signal processing for telecommunications. To optimize a major function I used assembly langage with SSE instructions.
My tools were :
- PellesC IDE (C, assembly)
- the Intel documentation
That was for x86 (32-bits) ; the C code could include assembly instructions.
The debugger can step through C or assembly code with access to the internal registers.
For AMD64, the assembly code must be handled separately ; that is a good choice.
So I need to resolve the "type" of a this reference, but I cannot do it without knowing how my object was created because what type arguments were used? This is where generics ridiculously complicate things.
I know how the C# compiler does it internally. Each generic instantiation is given its own "name" and type entry.
In the CodeDOM this just *can't* work that way. At least not in any fashion I can figure out. There is only one CodeTypeDeclaration for any given type, even if it is generic.
To make it otherwise would break the CodeDOM. I'm trying to use "userData" tags to mark up the codedom with extra information, but frankly, I don't even know how to "trace" the this reference back to the create object statement that brought it to life.
I've taken breaks. I've even coded different stuff to cleanse my mind. It's just not coming to me.
I'm so frustrated right now. This project is an absolute bear.
Edit: I'm not even 100% sure this is the right approach even if I do figure it out.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.