home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!netcomsv!terapin!paulk
- From: paulk@terapin.com (Paul Kienitz)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
- Subject: Re: Chunky Pixels vs. Bitplanes (was: Chunky Chip Set...)
- References: <doiron.0ka3@starpt.UUCP>
- Message-ID: <paulk.30qv@terapin.com>
- Date: 30 Dec 92 22:44:37 PST
- Organization: BBS
- Lines: 32
-
- > > Shifting/Masking is a no-time operation in hardware.
-
- It approaches no-time for large enough operations, you mean.
-
- > If you can make this magical piece of hardware, I'm sure Commodore
- > has a job position open for you.
-
- Well the regular blitter is not all that far off from being this
- magical. Shifting and masking basically has no speed cost except for
- needing to access one more word when your bits stretch over a word
- boundary.
-
- > > Now render a 64 color image to your 256 color display :)
-
- > The best you can hope for is a tie, since with planar you have to
- > clear the top two bitplanes anyways.
-
- Huh??? Eh? Duh?
-
- All you have to do is tell it to use only six planes now.
-
- Sounds like you're getting a little too wrapped up in this. Time to
- take some deep breaths and reoxygenate those crucial tissues.
-
- > And some chunky hardware supports color expansion, too, where you
- > take a single-bit image and can expand all 0's to one color and 1's
- > to another. Of course, a similar thing could be done for planar,
- > but you still have the masking/shifting/bandwidth on unaffected
- > pixels problems.
-
- You're talking about a case where you are implementing a planar
- display in your "chunky" system. Where's the difference?
-