| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2840 |
Release id #197710 : Transwarp v0.64
General Q&A thread, also report problems and error logs here. |
|
... 162 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
JackAsser
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 1989 |
Quote: Quoting JackAsserbut when do you reset it to 0..20? That is needed right? Sure. It's done just before loading the first file track, while stepping there. Then left untouched until stepping to the last file track. And get well soon! =)
Phew, I thought I'd lost "it". :D |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5017 |
wow, the fastloader boot is ammazing with and without ,1, btw why is $ never fastloaded? some transforming is going on by kernal?
whish I had this loader back in the day it feels like the disk turns into hdd. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2840 |
Quoting Oswaldwhy is $ never fastloaded? Intended fallback to whatever comes from KERNAL (custom or original) or your fastload cartridge.
Didn't want to re-invent all that, as Transwarp is planned to go into cartridge images (Superfluid V0.7) at some point anyways (need to type in suitable fallback fastloader for standard format first, though). |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5017 |
ok intended, but why ? |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2840 |
Quoting Oswaldok intended, but why ? Because "fastloading" the directory would require extra code.
Normally when loading "$", the drive converts the directory to a BASIC "program" that can be listed, and that one is sent to the computer.
There is not much to speed up except the data transfer, and speeding that up would require uploading some extra piece of code to the drive.
Unless redundantly storing the directory in listable BASIC format with Transwarp encoding next to the normal directory.
Did not want to do any of that.
Just use F3 on Action Replay or equivalent wedge commands with other add-ons. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2840 |
I wonder... for the fallback standard-format loader, would there be any interest in support for a parallel connection?
Looking at my notes, it may well be this could turn out to load even faster than Transwarp-encoded files over serial. |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 243 |
i have no clue about fastloaders or loaders in general. maybe a stupid question. but any chance to get a very fast irqloader version of your loader (great work btw)for our demos? :)
greets |
| |
BiGFooT
Registered: Mar 2002
Posts: 31 |
Quote: I wonder... for the fallback standard-format loader, would there be any interest in support for a parallel connection?
Looking at my notes, it may well be this could turn out to load even faster than Transwarp-encoded files over serial.
Just dumping out my realistic opinion here:
For daily use? Not really. Parallel transfer was a good solution back in time for backup purposes and to speed up the damn slow serial transfer. I don't see the this advantage today. Casual collectors use the standard variants, a few old farts have speed/dolphin machines and drives but I don't see the value of it. A fast, reliable serial fastloader is the best and more than enough for everyone. If there is a way to support the not real "replacements" (*IEC, anything not Ultimate) that would be the best for every user.
On the other point, an even faster experimental tool will be amazed and praised but won't be widely used at all further than trying it out. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2840 |
Quoting BiGFooTA fast, reliable serial fastloader is the best and more than enough for everyone. Noted. :)
Quoting BiGFooTIf there is a way to support the not real "replacements" (*IEC, anything not Ultimate) that would be the best for every user. Yes, i've been thinking about adding a fallback for SD2IEC and the like, using block-read commands and decoding on the C-64 side.
But then i still don't like the idea of explicit SD2IEC support... would probably have patched the firmware to support Krill's Loader, Repository Version 184 in the meantime otherwise. =) |
| |
Count Zero
Registered: Jan 2003
Posts: 1821 |
I think parallel cables are too few in use and even spread nowadays. Even in the old times not many people had them equipped I'd say.
Of course would be interesting to see speed differences and all but I suppose the work to put into that is not well spend, hm? :) |
| Previous - 1 | ... | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | ... | 18 - Next |
