Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2005 9:05 pm
heh 
but again thats not purebasic 
but again thats not purebasic That's not true, I asked you multiple times to explain what you wanted me to do, but the only "sensible" meaning to get from you was that I should put 24 bytes into 16 bytes.dagcrack wrote:Trond has some problem following rules :roll: - Hes a rocker... "don't tell me what to do you motha f****"Trond wrote:Hmm, I don't remember you said anything about that. What do you meant by "as little api as possible?".thefool wrote:uhmm the great thing about my exe was that it was written in purebasic without inline assembly!
if i wanted to write the smallest possible exe i would do it in assembler. Come with one that is smaller wich is written in purebasic! of course its possible i only used the little winapi as possible
