Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga.tech:4038 comp.sys.amiga:30287
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!purdue!decwrl!sun!pitstop!sundc!seismo!uunet!dg!bosch
From: bosch@dg.dg.com (Derek Bosch)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech,comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Fast 2-D Scrolling Method Needed
Message-ID: <113@dg.dg.com>
Date: 6 Mar 89 20:52:58 GMT
References: <112@dg.dg.com> <10871@well.UUCP>
Reply-To: bosch@dg.UUCP (Derek Bosch)
Organization: Data General, Westboro, MA.
Lines: 19

In article <10871@well.UUCP> ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) writes:
>	Well, you could try using 'tiles'.  That is, divide the virtual
>screen up into X by Y cells, each of which are a fixed size.  When you have
>your cells, you can represent your virtual screen as an array of bytes/words
>arranged as X by Y.  Each element in the array serves as an index into the
>array of cells you have created.  Thus, you can assemble your entire screen by
>blitting smaller cells into it.

Tiles sound like the way to go.  Which way is faster though?  1)  Create a new
bitmap by scrolling portions of the screen that stay on the screen, and blitting
in only the new portions of the screen.  2)  Create a totally new bitmap by 
blitting in each cell, each time you update the screen.  

It seems that at first glance that 1) would be faster, but I don't know.  Anyone
out there know for sure?

'tanks a lot!

-db-