Re: [Xmame] dirty update

2002-09-24 Thread Alastair Robinson
Hi Lawrence, On Tuesday 24 September 2002 7:29 pm, you wrote: > Since the palette dirty-handling is now done in the core, there shouldn't > be any problem using sysdep_palette's dirty flag for whatever you like. Great - that's what I'd done so I'll leave it that way... > The other possibilit

Re: [Xmame] dirty update

2002-09-24 Thread Pete French
> I think it was fairly redundant, if you can run Pacman at 1% or 9800% > does it really matter :). Actyally - heres a thing. I am running Mame32 under XP and I need frameskip opf aroudn 6 to run pacman. This is a 1.2GHz Athlon with a Radeon 7400 in it - not exactly slow hardware. Any ideas

Re: [Xmame] dirty update

2002-09-24 Thread Lawrence Gold
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 06:39:01PM +0100, Alastair Robinson wrote: > > What precisely is sysdep_palette_info->dirty currently used for, and am I > likely to break anything by using it for the Xv patch? Since the palette dirty-handling is now done in the core, there shouldn't be any problem usi

Re: [Xmame] dirty update

2002-09-24 Thread Alastair Robinson
Hi Everyone, On Tuesday 24 September 2002 3:27 pm, you wrote: > There is still dirty marking for vector games and tilemaps have a dirty > system as do pens. OK - just to make sure it's clear, the dirty flag I'm using in the Xv patch is the one in sysdep_palette.h, struct sysdep_palette_info -

Re: [Xmame] dirty update

2002-09-24 Thread Paul Priest
Lawrence Gold wrote: > On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 09:53:27AM +0200, Christian Groessler wrote: >> On 09/23/2002 08:07:41 PM CST Lawrence Gold wrote: >>> The dirty flag was used when the core supported dirty rectangles, >>> which it no longer does. With dirty-handling enabled, xmame would >>> attempt

Re: [Xmame] dirty update

2002-09-24 Thread Lawrence Gold
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 09:53:27AM +0200, Christian Groessler wrote: > > On 09/23/2002 08:07:41 PM CST Lawrence Gold wrote: > > > >The dirty flag was used when the core supported dirty rectangles, which it > >no longer does. With dirty-handling enabled, xmame would attempt to just > >update port

[Xmame] dirty update

2002-09-24 Thread Christian Groessler
On 09/23/2002 08:07:41 PM CST Lawrence Gold wrote: > >The dirty flag was used when the core supported dirty rectangles, which it >no longer does. With dirty-handling enabled, xmame would attempt to just >update portions of the bitmap instead of the entire bitmap. Do you know why was it removed?