Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!amdahl!oliveb!amiga!cbmvax!eric
From: eric@cbmvax.UUCP (Eric Cotton)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Double Buffering
Message-ID: <2745@cbmvax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 12-Nov-87 13:20:44 EST
Article-I.D.: cbmvax.2745
Posted: Thu Nov 12 13:20:44 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 14-Nov-87 19:33:11 EST
References: <7768@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP> <4414@well.UUCP> <1862@cadovax.UUCP> <2740@cbmvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: eric@cbmvax.UUCP (Eric Cotton)
Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA
Lines: 22
Keywords: double buffering, vertical retrace, screens

In article <2740@cbmvax.UUCP> carolyn@cbmvax.UUCP (Carolyn Scheppner CATS) writes:
>>
>>Um, wouldn't this be a case where WaitBOVP() would be a teensy bit better?
>>You get to render through the vertical interval, instead of starting at
>>the top of the next screen after the vertical interval.  Or has everyone 
>>just given up on WaitBOVP()?
>
>   WaitBOVP(vp) busywaits, WaitTOF() does not.  This has to be taken in
>consideration.  For non-multitasking type applications, WaitBOVP(vp) should
>be ok.

Which isn't to say that non-multitasking type applications are encouraged!
-- 
	Eric Cotton
	Commodore-Amiga

  *======================================================================*
 *=====     UUCP: {rutgers|ihnp4|allegra}!cbmvax!eric                =====*
*=====      FONE: (215) 431-9100                                      =====*
*=====      MAIL: 1200 Wilson Drive / West Chester, PA 19380          =====*
 *=====     PAUL: "I don't find this stuff amusing anymore."         =====*
  *======================================================================*