Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!uupsi!sunic!dkuug!diku!seifert
From: seifert@diku.dk (Michael Seifert)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.acorn
Subject: Re: Archimedes Suggestions
Message-ID: <1991Feb13.151346.16184@odin.diku.dk>
Date: 13 Feb 91 15:13:46 GMT
References: <1991Feb11.124128.2990@cns.umist.ac.uk> <1991Feb12.212522.14434@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Sender: news@odin.diku.dk (Netnews System)
Organization: Department of Computer Science, U of Copenhagen
Lines: 36

gcwilliams@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Graeme Williams) writes:

[much stuff deleted]
>> I'd like to see faster screen updates regardless of mode. Now I haven't
>> any sound ideas on how this should be done - perhaps a second bus and
>> screen memory, or a BLITTER chip ?

>Does this mean I'll have to learn how to write code for a second chip??
>The nice elegant ARM code is plenty enough complexity for me. Also
>having screen memory separate would spoil the simplicity and elegance of
>things. (I'm a great believer in keeping things clean and simple and
>efficient, for a reason why one only has too look at a 386 running DOS.)

>"Blitter chip" - sounds like Amiga or Atari. No thanks. Crank the ARM's
>clock speed up another notch instead.

Agree. BUT! What if the blitter was just another ARM-2? I like that thought.
Am I correct in assuming that the ARM-2 is only around 20 pounds?
(at the facory?)

[more stuff deleted]
>Here's one thing I'd like to see. The graphics code in ROM for drawing
>circles and rectangles and such like appears to be very inefficient,
>it'd be nice if these could be made faster (like by a factor of 3 or 4
>in some cases - I believe this is possible)

Just think if they ran on a "blitter" ARM? AFter all isn't it Apple
among others who have considered using the ARM for a graphics
accelerator?

>Graeme Williams - a Kiwi in Canada
>gcwilliams@watdragon.waterloo.edu


--Michael Seifert
seifert@freja.diku.dk