Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!uunet!cbmvax!spence
From: spence@cbmvax.commodore.com (Spencer Shanson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Subject: Re: AreaFills under 2.0?
Message-ID: <22668@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 24 Jun 91 23:05:29 GMT
References: <6621@ns-mx.uiowa.edu>
Reply-To: spence@cbmvax.commodore.com (Spencer Shanson)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 29

In article <6621@ns-mx.uiowa.edu> bneal@umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu (Brian Neal) writes:
>Hello All,
>	I have a program that I wrote that draws a lot of triangles via
>AreaMove/Draw/End calls.  This program worked fine on my Amiga 500.  When
>I got my A3000 I thought I would recompile it to take advantage of the
>math chip.  But now it doesn't draw anything!  I am pretty sure the
>bug is taking place in the Area calls, as if I replace them by Move and
>Draw I get a correct wire frame picture.  Has something changed in order
>to use these calls?   I have 2.03 and am using Aztec C 5.0d.
>
The Area..() functions should not be affected by the type of maths chip.
Could you post some source code that shows the problem? It needn't be the
whole program, just a snippet of relevant code.

>	Also, AreaMove & AreaDraw are returning 0 (no error).  
>According to the 1.3 RKMs AreaEnd also returns a value, but why does Manx's 
>functions.h have AreaEnd prototyped as returning void?
>Any advice is greatly appreciated.
>
>Brian


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spencer Shanson - Amiga Software Engineer     | email: spence@commodore.COM
                                              | or uunet!cbmvax!spence
All opinions expressed are my own, and do not | Bix: sshanson
(necessarily) represent those of Commodore.   | "Copper? I hardly even
                                              | know her!"