home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: oreig.uji.es!ii202
- From: ii202@rossegat.uji.es (Jorge Acereda Macia)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
- Subject: Re: C2P
- Date: 22 Jan 1996 20:28:55 GMT
- Organization: Universitat Jaume I. Castell≤ de la Plana. Spain
- Distribution: world
- Message-ID: <4e0s27$hld@oreig.uji.es>
- References: <4cu7vo$17q@sinsen.sn.no> <4djdu8$ba@oreig.uji.es> <4dkbml$em2@maureen.teleport.com> <4dm3sm$pvm@sunsystem5.informatik.tu-muenchen.de> <4dp3vb$nf2@maureen.teleport.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: @rossegat.uji.es
- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
-
- Stephan Schaem (sschaem@teleport.com) wrote:
- > Who want to look at a 320x256 display when I'm interested in 256x200 ?
- > mpixel is eassy to manipulate to your need.And you wont come across
- > a claim like I can c2p in 8ms... and then realize it was 160x200 screen
- > 2x2 he was talking about :)
-
- Then we should talk about X NxN mpix/sec
-
- I agree X ms for 320x256 is not a good nomenclature. Many people
- use 256x256 or 320x200 in their code.
-
- Greets,
- --
- ---------------------------- --------------------------------------------
- | Jorge Acereda | Dream the same thing everynight |
- | ii202@rossegat.uji.es | I see our freedom in my sight |
- | Intel Outside | No locked doors, no windows barred |
- | Amiga Rules | No things to make my brain seem scarred |
- ---------------------------- --------------------------------------------
-