On Mon, 23 Aug 1999 18:24:23 +0200, Laurens Holst wrote:
>> This is weird. VDP needs RAM information to put a single sprite on the
>> screen?
>??? WHAT are you talking about???
You said that a routine to display sprites work under BASIC and not on DOS
because DOS uses the upper memory for itself. So, I thought this is strange.
I DON'T think VDP needs RAM info to display sprites. (-:
>> I'm talking DOS with Himem.Sys. Sorry. I did not specified correctly.
>With Himem.sys DOS can't go further than 640kB either. Only some TSRs like
>mousdriver, CDROM driver can be loaded into the "upper" memory, that is the
>memory between the 640kB and the 1MB barrier. And this 'gap' between 640kB
>and 1MB can be even smaller because some old (very old) videocards use some
>memory inbetween too.
>By the way, it was DOS4GW.EXE I think...
Oh, yes... And Windows3.1 is a 32bit OS. Himem DO acess to 16Mb! It's
eXtended Memory (XMS) driver!
>> Yes, but it's extremely boring.
>? Boring?
>Well it's not very handy (???) indeed.
Yes. It is what I think. It's boring.
>> (it's not right, RicBit? This info I received from a guy called "Paulo
>Mario"... On that time he sent me a lot of technical info, but I just have not enough
>time to verify his words...).
>You call me RicBit? (turning into the Hulk)
>Hmm... I think it's not entirely correct.
No. This is a public list, right? I "called" RicBit (Ricardo Bittencourt) help
on a topic that he has a lot more knowledge than myself. On PC I'm a
C/C++ programmer. I program ASM only on MSX.
>> Yep. This is "almost" the idea. New programs would use the first 4Mb
>> too.
>> Including to to a taskswitch environment.
>Multitasking?
Maybe. Uzix already does Multitask. Actually with 32K programs. But on the
new system, it will be possible be done with 4Mb programs! (-: (Maybe)...
>Well okay. But I still think you don't need Dos to return the info about
>other tasks...
I agree that is not needed, but it would be useful! (-:
>> If there is slot switching, there is lost of time.
>No they don't do slotswitching.
>The routine stays in the upper memory (somewhere at #EF00 or so...).
Oh, THESE are the routines that are taking my RAM away?!?! (((((((((((((((-:
>> On the way the software was done, I fear yes, you are right.
>Once again :)...
This is not very good. In this case you should be unhappy to be right.
>> Yes! Z380 HAVE Z80 mode. In fact, is starts on Z80 mode.
>> You have to change it do Z380 mode. The bad thing is, once in
>> the Z380 mode, you cannot back to Z80 mode without a hardware
>> reset. )-:
>I thought only Z80 instruction emulation, not Z80 timing emulation. But that
>is great indeed. It solves a lot of problems... The (virtual)
>processorswitching doesn't have to be done by the MSX-Engine, moving all
>register-values from Z80 to Z380 etc... And no extra processor (the Z80) is
>needed.
Yep. I think Zilog made Z380 to simplify the convertion of Z80 systems to
Z380.
But maybe Z280 was better. Z280 had a mode like V86 on 386... This means
we could open several Z80 sessions on the Z280. But this is a little confuse to
use.
[]'s Daniel Caetano ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
...What I like about MS is its loyalty to customers!
OS/2 Sites: http://www.os2brasil.com.br/novidades/
http://www.os2brasil.com.br/novidades/drivers.shtml
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/8752/os2hp/index.html
MSX Sites: http://www.fudeba.cjb.net/ e http://www.msxnews.cjb.net/
MSX Phoenix: http://www.msxphoenix.cjb.net/
****
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/)
****
