CU Amiga Super CD-ROM 2/CU Amiga Magazine's Super CD-ROM 02 (1996)(EMAP Images)(GB)[!][issue 1996-04].iso/magazine/amiga_e/amigae.june.archive/000077_crash!minyos.xx….OZ.AU!s924723_Sun, 13 Jun 93 19:46:49 PST.msg

Text File | 1993-08-31 | 4KB | 68 lines

Received: by bkhouse.cts.com (V1.16/Amiga)
    id AA00000; Sun, 13 Jun 93 19:46:49 PST
Received: from peladon.rmit.OZ.AU by crash.cts.com with smtp
    (Smail3.1.28.1 #15) id m0o52lI-0000OtC; Sun, 13 Jun 93 17:51 PDT
Received: from minyos.xx.rmit.OZ.AU by peladon.rmit.OZ.AU with SMTP id AA16940
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for <[e-mail]>); Mon, 14 Jun 1993 10:50:55 +1000
Received: by minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1993 10:50:57 +1000 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]> from "Barry D. Wills" at Jun 13, 93 00:28:00 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 2801
From: [e-mail] (Son Huu Le)
To: [e-mail] (Barry D. Wills)
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: arp conversion

>
> Got your conversion ok.  Thanks!  No need to apologize.  I didn't know what to
> do with all those STRUCTURE statements and Amiga types APTR, UWORD, etc.  A68k
> wouldn't take some, PhxAss wouldn't take the others.  I'll give it a shot and
> see what happens.  If the PatternMatch() function works, I'll say it was worth
> it.  Just for grins, what did you do to the .i file to get it to compile?  Did
> Devpac accept it without much complaint or did it involve some rearranging?

Don't know, used A68k (; - Thought it would be best to use what Wouter uses.
And yes, lotsa modifications, that's why I'm unsure about those structures
(they were the modified ones). Basicly, iconvert doesn't understand LIBSKP,
so they were removed (no harm done and I think iconvert skips over LIBENT too)
and I had to hack the UNION structure to be on it's on (iconvert can't process
them either) and that's it.

> While I'm replying I'll include some stuff about epp014.  I tried it out and
> didn't notice much diff. Before you panic let me say that was on my '030.  But
> when I booted with the 68000 I saw a tremendous difference. I measured about a
> 25% increase in speed.  Good job!  One thing that did the opposite of what I
> expected is that I thought if I added open*Count and tested for 0 it would be
> faster than saying IF (oStrCnt = 0) AND (oCharCnt = 0)...  Not so.Evidently
> Wouter uses something special in there.

(; On a '030 I don't think you'd notice anything much (;
As for the adding check, I was uncertain, but it sure look good. I think I
could push it to maybe half speed, but then your code would have been hack
to beyond recognition/understanding (;

> Did you distribute epp014 yet? I'm thinking about stripping comments to speed
> it up.If 0.14 is out then I'll start working on 0.15b (which I *may* just make
> 1.0 (no longer beta).  If you haven't distributed it, I'm thinking maybe I
> should release it now .vs. in a few days to a week. Most programmers out there
> don't extensively comment their code anyway |-) HOWEVER, the comments that epp
> inserts in the final output eats a little time.  What say you?

Firstly, no I didn't release it, thought I'd mail you my changes and perhaps
wait for you to "officially" release it. Stripping comments would spped it up,
by how much I don't know.. but I think's best to leave them in. It's best if
you knew what came from where... maybe two version.. nice coding and speed
demon?

Btw: if I've not already mentioned, I've got all your link examples, but still
haven't had time to look at them closely. I think I must query is when you
ListAdd to a dynamically allocated List(5), wouldn't Adding add another List
so List=6.. can't you start with 1 List and Add?

Bye!
Son Le (called me anything you like, or God if you prefer :)