Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Speed of Allegro Datafiles
From: you AT somehost DOT somedomain (Herman Schoenfeld)
Organization: Your Organization
Distribution: world
References: <34176C9A DOT 6E20 AT voyageur DOT ca> <Wi7mc5ADIHG0EwpB AT talula DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
NNTP-Posting-Host: 139.134.42.195
Message-ID: <341917e7.0@139.134.5.33>
Date: 12 Sep 97 10:22:31 GMT
Lines: 21
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk

In article <Wi7mc5ADIHG0EwpB AT talula DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>, Shawn AT talula DOT demon DOT co DOT uk 
says...
>
>>When an Allegro datafile is loaded into
>>memory, is each object treated individually?  For example, is blitting a
>>bitmap from a datafile onto the screen the same as blitting a bitmap
>>which was created at runtime?  
>
>Absolutely. How an object was created makes no difference to the format
>of the data, so it doesn't matter whether it was loaded from a datafile
>or not. The datafile routines are simply a handy way of storing lots of
>objects in a single file, and making sure the data is always loaded in a
>ready-to-go Allegro format: they don't affect how the data behaves once
>it is in memory.
>
>

Why doesn't Allegro (or WIP?) use a decent memory allocation routine apart from 
the standard ones given by libc.a?

ie, allegro partitions memory making it hard to allocate big needed paragraphs 
of memory.