Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!dali.cs.montana.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!tut!kaakkuri!kp74615
From: kp74615@kaakkuri.tut.fi (Karri Tapani Palovuori)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Using CPU instead of Blitter for speed
Message-ID: <13493@etana.tut.fi>
Date: 7 Jun 90 12:24:43 GMT
References: <1990Jun3.164446.12193@ameristar> <1990Jun4.134811.12142@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <30974@ut-emx.UUCP> <3022@crash.cts.com>
Sender: News@tut.fi
Reply-To: kp74615@kaakkuri.tut.fi (Karri Tapani Palovuori)
Distribution: comp
Organization: Tampere University of Technology, Finland
Lines: 24

In article <3022@crash.cts.com> jcs@crash.cts.com (John Schultz) writes:

>then blit the mask to each bitplane. If you want polygons that don't have
>broken or coarse edges, you must re-outline the mask with lines using 
>the blitter.  

This is not necessary. You can draw the leftmost lines one bit too left and
use exclusive fill mode.

Further, with blitter optimized code you can draw polygons of any shape,
including holes in them. This is a great advantage in some situations.

I agree that the 68000 is sometimes faster than the blitter. But it really
depends on the average polygon size and shape.

But the speedup gained by faster processors is one of the strongest points
supporting CPU-drawing. I think.


>  John



Karri