EnigmA Amiga Run 1996 June/EnigmA AMIGA RUN 08 (1996)(G.R. Edizioni)(IT)[!][issue 1996-06][EARSAN CD VII].iso/earcd/amos/amsls496.lzh/AMOSLIST/[e-mail]_Mon Apr 29 21:29:51 1996.msg

Internet Message Format | 1996-05-01 | 4KB

Received: from svcs1.digex.net (svcs1.digex.net [204.91.197.224]) by mail1.access.digex.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA18468;  for <[e-mail]> ; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 21:29:48 -0400
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by svcs1.digex.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA06016 for amos-out; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 17:35:04 -0400
Received: from mail1.access.digex.net (mail1-2.access.digex.net [204.91.197.3]) by svcs1.digex.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA06013 for <[e-mail]>; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 17:35:03 -0400
Received: from conan.eds-ms.com (conan.eds-ms.com [204.240.136.11]) by mail1.access.digex.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA15099;  for <[e-mail]> ; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 17:35:03 -0400
Received: from relay-2.mail.demon.net (disperse.demon.co.uk) by conan.eds-ms.com (5.x/SMI-SVR4)
    id AA07164; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 17:35:02 -0400
Received: from post.demon.co.uk ([158.152.1.72]) by relay-2.mail.demon.net
          id ak21038; 29 Apr 96 21:57 +0100
Received: from mirex.demon.co.uk ([158.152.68.125]) by relay-3.mail.demon.net
          id ad21370; 29 Apr 96 21:56 +0100
Received: by mirex.demon.co.uk (V1.16/Amiga)
    id AA0047v; Mon, 29 Apr 96 13:35:12 GMT
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 96 13:35:12 GMT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
         (from "R.A. Lawrence" <[e-mail]>)
         (at Sat, 27 Apr 1996 18:16:29 +0100 (BST))
Organization: Mirex Software
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Keith Hill <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Blitz vs Amos - again!
Status: RO
X-Status:

To the one known as R.A.,

> 2) Amos is slow, you have to wake up and realise that. I've rewritten
> several of my amos programs in Blitz and they go like s**t off a hot =
shovel
> (even with the debugger on) compaired to the amos crawl.

Everything re-written runs faster...  Actually, what sort of speed incr=
ease
are you getting ??

> 3) Amos compiled files are huge, if anyone feels like writing one tha=
t
> compiles an amos program efficiently, then please let the Amos world =
know.
> Yes i know you can compress them, but that isn't the point is it?

Thats what hard disks are for.  My next game is currently at 20megs..  =
(of
course its mostly sound and graphics)

> 4) Whoever did that table was very biased towards Amos. If you going =
to do
> a able like that be objective - if your going to write a `simple` gam=
e
> which isn't processor intensive and you want to write it quickly then=
=20use
> Amos. If you have a bit more time (and your game is a little more
> intensive) then use Blitz otherwise forget it all and go for C.

Ok, I'm biased, but every time I'm about to write something, I have to
actually justify the fact I'm gonna use amos, or whatever other languag=
e I'm
about to use.  I would like to know a few benchmarks (graphic wise, com=
piled
loop wise) for amos+extensions vs whatever.  It'd be very interesting.
=20
> 5) To speed up your Amos programs get an accelerator? Heh, i wish! :-=
)

Actually, I find most of my stuff limited by the speed of the actual ch=
ips
in my amiga not being able to transfer stuff around fast enough.  ..wel=
l, as
far as I know, its the chips.

> I'm not a true Blitz fan. I still love Amos but to be perfectly hones=
t
> Amos has had its day and what with the lack of support from europress=
=20and
> the forthcomming Blitz3 we'll probably all be talking about Blitz in =
the
> distant future.

Looks like we already are.

=20_   _   _        _     _   _     |  Do you know how successful censo=
rship
|_> |_| |_| |\ | |_ |  | | /   |  |  is on television ?  Don't know ?
|_> | \ | | | \| |_ |_ |_| \_  .  |  Successful isn't it.  - Max Headro=
om
=20                                 | =20