17 Jan
2014
17 Jan
'14
7:24 a.m.
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:08:43PM -0500, Sean Conner wrote:
It was thus said that the Great Eivind Evensen once
stated:
Yes, I was thinking about software timing. Like diskloaders using dbf-loops,
code assuming that the blitter was finished before setting up the next
operation and so on. Many demos do that.
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 10:28:20AM +0000, Peter
Corlett wrote:
First off, the 68000 and the 68010 had a different stack layout for
exceptions, so the operating system needed patching. Also, at least one
instruction (MOVE SR,dest) was bumped from a user instruction to a
priviledged instruction, so further changes to the operating system were
required (to emulate that instruction in userspace).
I'm not sure of any timing issues, as I am more into the software side of
things than hardware. My fuzzy memory suggested that it might have been
in the short-lived Amiga 600,
although the Internet isn't agreeing with me and I may be thinking of the
'EC020 that was used in the A1200. However, I can apparently buy a *new*
"accelerator" for the Amiga 500 that uses an overclocked 'EC000 part. (I
hope
they are a bit more reliable than the 14MHz 68010 I tried back in 1990, and
which was sent back within the week as Not Fit For Purpose.)
Just curious, were the problems related to hardware or software relying
on cpu timing and the likes? -spc (Who loved programming on the 68000 ... )
Yes, it's still a pleasure. I try to use my Amigas as often as I can just
to write some assembly. At least I need to power them on each time these
other peecees have annoyed simply too much.