Date:	Mon, 1 Mar 1999 17:41:13 +0200 (IST)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	kevin AT reality-bytes DOT demon DOT co DOT uk
cc:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Is Allegro too slow for 648 * 480 double buffering ?
In-Reply-To:	<36d9a7ad.35181236@158.152.254.68>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.990301173710.24475G-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

On Sun, 28 Feb 1999, Kevin wrote:

> would enable me to do what I wanted to do a little quicker, there are
> always quicker ways to achieve a task depending on what lengths you
> are prepared to go to, otherwise people like ID would be using
> Allegro. 

I submit that id Software didn't use Allegro for only one reason: when 
Quake was being written, Allegro didn't yet exist!  Otherwise, they would 
most certainly use at least some of Allegro functionality.

How do I know?  Because id *did* use everything in DJGPP that was 
available at the time.  Where the existing DJGPP functionality was too 
slow or too restrictive (like the lack of nearptr hack), they requested
and got improvements from which we all benefit to this day.

- Raw text -