Path: utzoo!attcan!telly!lethe!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!apollo!rehrauer
From: rehrauer@apollo.HP.COM (Steve Rehrauer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st.tech
Subject: Re: Closing AES boxes interfering with VDI drawing
Keywords: aes dialog
Message-ID: <4eb2849b.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM>
Date: 19 Dec 90 22:56:00 GMT
References: <3391@medusainformatik.uni-erlangen.de> <1990Dec18.161238.24031@unixg.ubc.ca> <4545@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl> <1990Dec19.150920.12812@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Sender: root@apollo.HP.COM
Reply-To: rehrauer@apollo.HP.COM (Steve Rehrauer)
Distribution: na
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Apollo Division - Chelmsford, MA
Lines: 22

gl8f@astsun.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:
>In article <4545@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl> jeroen@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl (Jeroen Fokker) writes:
>>It is my decision to sacrifice portability later
>>for efficiency now. I am aware of the fact that it 
>>is harmful.
>
>The question is, of course, is how much faster is your hard-wired
>routine than using a software-blitter? It's better to fix the slow ROM
>code in one place than fix it in all your programs.

Which (code in TOS ROMs) is out of Jeroen's control.  And, this assumes
that Atari *will* optimize the ROMs in our lifetimes.

(*Have* they significantly sped-up AES or VDI since v1.0 of the ROMs?
I'm genuinely curious, not flaming.  Were the 1.4 ROMs, or the 1.6 ROMs
in STes, tuned in any way for graphics performance?  My impression from
reading this group was not...)

--
"The goons are riding motorcycles, but WE'VE  | (Steve) rehrauer@apollo.hp.com
 got a whole big metal car! This will be like | The Apollo Systems Division of
 stepping on ants..." -- Freelance Police     |       Hewlett-Packard