Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/06/01/19:34:39
On Mon, 26 May 1997 19:13:16 +0100, Shawn Hargreaves
<Shawn AT talula DOT demon DOT co DOT uk> wrote:
>jon writes:
<much excellent response from Shawn edited, refer to original>
>If executable size is really a concern, you might also wish to edit the
>file graphics.c, find the list of available graphics drivers (near the
>top of the file), and delete the ones that you aren't using. You'll
>probably be able to cut the size down quite a bit by removing the mode-X
>and Xtended drivers, as with those two gone all the planar drawing code
>will be removed. Getting rid of all the SVGA drivers will also help a
>bit, although in this case you will only be removing the driver code and
>not the drawing routines as well (even if you are only using mode-X
>resolutions, the linear drawing functions are needed for use with memory
>bitmaps).
Well, you've answered my question more than adequately- thanks so
much. Truth is, now that I have an idea what is in there, and that it
doesn't grow with code size, I probably am not going to concerm myself
much more with it. And if I ever did really need to strip it down, I'd
follow your excellent advice shown above.
<...>
>Re. whoever it was that mentioned stripping Allegro, that isn't relevant
>for library code. You can't run strip on liballeg.a (if you do, the
>linker is going to get upset because it needs a symbol table to know
>which bit of code corresponds to each function!) but as long as you use
>the -s flag when linking your program, or run strip on the resulting
>executable, the Allegro symbols will get removed along with the ones
>from your own code. The standard Allegro library is compiled without
>debugging info: if anyone wants to be able to debug into the library
>functions, set the environment variable DEBUGMODE=1 before compiling and
>you'll get a non-optimised version with a full set of debug symbols...
I am glad you addressed this- I was considering tinkering around with
the makefile and rebuilding.
>>Oh, and on a more general front- what do any of you suggest as the
>>best way to move a mouse over an arbitrary-sized buffer (BITMAP) in
>>RAM?
<...>
>You can use the set_mouse_range() function in Allegro, or int 0x33 with
>ax=7 and ax=8 if you prefer to do it yourself, to tell the mouse driver
>that you want the mouse to be able to extend past the edge of the
>screen. This depends on the mouse driver handling big ranges properly,
>though, and I'm not sure how safe that assumption is...
>
>Alternatively, you could keep polling the mouse, measuring how far it
>has moved from the centre of the screen, and then resetting it back to
>the middle (Allegro position_mouse() routine, or int 0x33 ax=4), so it
>will be able to go on moving forever without hitting the edge of the
>screen. This is prone to some loss of responsiveness, though, as every
>time you reset the position the mouse driver loses whatever fractional
>position information it has been accumulationg.
Talk about support! You certainly do address your users' problems, and
fast. I'll leave the above in for anybody who misses the post; I'm
probably not the only guy who has wondered about such mouse uses.
Thanks again, ever so much.
>The ideal way to do it is to use mouse mickeys. which is quite easy and
>will be supported by the next Allegro version, but I haven't quite
>finished it yet :-) If you want to do it yourself, int 0x33 ax=11 should
>give you all the info you need...
Looking forward to it.
- Raw text -