Message-ID:	<380F58BD.9FDDC7CF@connect.ab.ca>
Date:	Thu, 21 Oct 1999 18:17:33 +0000
From:	Tom Fjellstrom <tomcf AT connect DOT ab DOT ca>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.61 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language:	en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
CC:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Plague of the slow 'blit' routine :)
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 991021191954 DOT 4851E-100000 AT is>
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> On Thu, 21 Oct 1999, Tom Fjellstrom wrote:
>
> > But I can't be completely sure if the 'bitmap' i'm blitting
> > to or from is in video memory. If I could then it would make sense
> > to call the dosmemput or farptr functions only for those 'bitmaps'.
> > I may be wrong but I don't think 'regular' memory can (or should?) be
> > accessed with dosmemput or those farptr functions.
>
> For ``normal'' memory, simply use memcpy or whatever C functions are
> appropriate.  There's no need neither for farptr nor for
> __djgpp_nearptr_enable stuff.

yes I understand this part.

>
> > The only way I have thought of determining that a bitmap is in video memory
> > is too add a variable to the bitmap struct when creating it to indicate
> > whether or not it is in video memory.
>
> I'm not sure I follow.  How come you don't know where's the bitmap in a
> program that you yourself wrote?

Because I want to call the same routine on any bitmap whether or not
it's a regular bitmap, the screen, or a sub bitmap of the screen.

--

"An Optimist will say the glass is half full,
 A Pessimist will say the glass is half empty,
 A Canadian will say Waiter!"

Tom Fjellstrom
tomcf AT connect DOT ab DOT ca

- Raw text -