Alwin Henseler wrote:
> For instance, something that only supports DOS2, can
> not, or very difficult be used with emulators, and when you're
> writing something for MSX these days, I think you should do it so,
> that it will also work on emulators, or at least don't go to great
> lengths to PREVENT it from doing so. 8-(
>
And that's just one other reason to make sure a "good" emulator has to
written.
For me the ultimate emulator should be able to emulate (at least :-) :
1. Do a good V9938 emulation (V9958 would be better !!)
- vdp(24) on every moment
- vdp(18) on every line (every horizontal demo wave uses this)
- cope with chaning pallet registers on every line.
- have a good S#2 and #S0 emulation (for waiting until
vertical/horizontal traceback or polling the line interrupt)
- allow to rewrite vdp (20), the line interrupt register, during the
buidling of the screen, so that you can have multiple screen
splits (by interrupt)
2. correct timing for z80 commando's
3. correct timing for VDP execution
4. correct timing for MSX-audio
5. run MSX-DOS2
6. Have a good hard-disk emulation
In short when it can emulate perfectly Unkown Reality (by NOP) by
emulating a harddisk and dos2 and still do the turning audio scoop
thing( vdp(24) in the middle of the screen and reading the audio sample
for it)
Ofcourse if theire REALMotion could run , that would also be great !
David Heremans
--
"How should I know if it works? That's what beta testers
are for. I only coded it."
(Attributed to Linus Torvalds, somewhere in a posting)
****
MSX Mailinglist. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put
in the body (not subject) "unsubscribe msx [EMAIL PROTECTED]" (without the
quotes :-) Problems? contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] (www.stack.nl/~wiebe/mailinglist/)
****
