Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!ll-xn!mit-eddie!bbn!rochester!PT.CS.CMU.EDU!andrew.cmu.edu!rs4u+ From: rs4u+@andrew.cmu.edu (Richard Siegel) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer Subject: Re: several questions about MAC II Message-ID: Date: 3 Mar 88 19:59:11 GMT Organization: Carnegie Mellon University Lines: 26 In-Reply-To: <2218@isis.UUCP> 1) LightspeedC's a good choice. I'm biased, but it's a good choice. 2) Can't answer this one; my data acquisition was done at a higher level. 3) The 68882 is supposed to be plug- and software-compatible with the 68881; however, I understand that there are some differences in the exception handling. You may wish to just optimize your programming rather than trying to substitute a different chip. The Mac II wasn't designed with the 68882 in mind, and substituting it could get you in trouble. 4) I was doing more complicated graphics in real time; QuickDraw is fast enough that you won't have to be worried about it bottlenecking your acquisition. --Rich =================================================================== Richard Siegel THINK Technologies, QA Technician (on leave) I'm not physically at THINK, so my information may be out of date. Be forewarned. Arpa: rich.siegel@andrew.cmu.edu UUCP: {decvax,ucbvax,sun}!andrew.cmu.edu!rich.siegel ==================================================================