Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uupsi!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: Information on Amiga Technical Reference Seri Message-ID: <1991Jun17.144051.3418@sugar.hackercorp.com> Organization: Sugar Land Unix -- Houston, TX References: <22455@cbmvax.commodore.com> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1991 14:40:51 GMT In article mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes: > Consider the case where you want to do BltMaskBitMapBitMap(), which the OS > doesn't have. You could roll your own by taking the source to > BltMaskBitMapRastPort() (that is a mouthful :) and hack out what you don't > want. And if enough people do that sort of thing it blocks Commodore from usefully changing the blitter interface. It might be arguable that in this particular case it's too late, but what about all the rest of the code out there? Why not just fake up a RastPort and call BltMaskBitMapRastPort? I agree, a BltMaskBitMapBitMap would be more general, but instead of inventing new tools why not try figuring out to use the ones you have? > The apps that use routines done this way won't at all break under future > OS revs or anything. How do you know? -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' . 'U` "Have you hugged your wolf today?"