home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!rutgers!cbmvax!chrisg
- From: chrisg@cbmvax.commodore.com (Chris Green)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
- Subject: Re: Library Call?
- Message-ID: <33173@cbmvax.commodore.com>
- Date: 21 Jul 92 13:52:50 GMT
- References: <jbickers.0bfo@templar.actrix.gen.nz> <paulk.0tlw@terapin.com>
- Reply-To: chrisg@cbmvax.commodore.com (Chris Green)
- Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
- Lines: 21
-
- In article <paulk.0tlw@terapin.com> paulk@terapin.com (Paul Kienitz) writes:
- >> On a related note, does anyone know why the SAS pragmas now use
- >> libcall instead of syscall for the exec.library stuff? It used
- >> to be that you didn't need _SysBase - the compiler would just
- >> grab the value from 0x00000004 when ieeded it.
- >
- >Getting the value from fast ram wold save a cycle here and there, I
- >presume. Though if you're accessing _SysBase with 32 bit absolute
- >addressing (large data), then it might be slower insteadf faster.
-
- Actually, it could save as many as ~400 cycles (7.1mhz 68000),
- or ~1600 (25mhz 030) if the screen is displaying 4 bitplane hires.
-
- --
- *-------------------------------------------*---------------------------*
- |Chris Green - Graphics Software Engineer - chrisg@commodore.COM f
- | Commodore-Amiga - uunet!cbmvax!chrisg n
- |My opinions are my own, and do not - icantforgettheimpression o
- |necessarily represent those of my employer.- youmadeyouleftaholeinthe r
- | - backofmyhead d
- *-------------------------------------------*---------------------------*
-