| |
Raistlin
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 680 |
100% versions..? Party versions..? etc..?
So, I was wondering ...
Both "Delirious 11" and "X Marks the Spot" have the RESTORE key crash... and "X Marks" has a last minute glitch that crept in...
For myself I'd love to release a 100% version ... but I also kinda wouldn't - because doing so "dirties" the CSDB releases somewhat ... there'd then be something like an "X Marks Party Version" and "X Marks 100% Version" sullying the charts ........
I know Comaland had a 100% version, I can see it right now sat nicely at #2 in the charts ... but that version has more changed since the party version than what I'd likely do...
What do others think? Leave the demos alone and move on .. or go back and fix them. |
|
... 48 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
ChristopherJam
Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1409 |
So, back to the original topic - are 101% versions released during or shortly after party "outside compo" releases? Or not associated with party? |
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4732 |
Quote: So, back to the original topic - are 101% versions released during or shortly after party "outside compo" releases? Or not associated with party?
They are not related to the compo at all, as they weren't released during the compo, nor competing in it. :) |
| |
Smasher
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 520 |
Quote:What I said at X was ”don’t tell Burglar not to press Restore, as that might trigger him to actually press it” ;)
ROTFL |
| |
Peiselulli
Registered: Oct 2006
Posts: 81 |
The only disadvantage of Krills proposal that I see is that you cannot use $dd04 and $dd05 any more to put a jump directly into the CIA timer A, so you can only jump indirectly with jmp ($dd04).
And no, I don't want to store code into data direction registers of the CIAs.
2 cycles wasted ... |
| |
ChristopherJam
Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1409 |
The Burglar cannot push restore if you disable his hand! |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2980 |
Quoting PeiselulliThe only disadvantage of Krills proposal that I see is that you cannot use $dd04 and $dd05 any more to put a jump directly into the CIA timer A, so you can only jump indirectly with jmp ($dd04).
And no, I don't want to store code into data direction registers of the CIAs.
2 cycles wasted ... Alright, then how about this:
Have the 63-cycle period in a CIA2 timer (A or B does not matter) and let it trigger interrupts (NMIs).
Then have the 9-cycle counter in CIA1 timer B. CIA1 timer A counter registers $dc04/05 are free to use for the JMP opcode $4c and the jump address lo-byte. The jump address hi-byte is $dc06 (the current cycle counter of timer B), so you can point the NMI vector to $dc04.
That is, the second timer does not need to count underflows of the other timer. Both merely need to be synchronised, which is only a matter of starting them at the correct time, as both are running with the same clock. |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5094 |
Gunnar why dont you code shit anymore, you still got it :) what a waste |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2980 |
Who said i ever stopped? :)
Zoompinski [512 bytes]
Grey Screen with No Music [2+4 bytes]
Krill's Loader, Repository Version 166
The Cyan Goddess
(And no worries, there's still real stuff in the pipeline.) |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5094 |
misc small shit, we need +h2k19 :) |
| |
Burglar
Registered: Dec 2004
Posts: 1101 |
new at X: The Press Restore Compo
you can win the RESTORE award if you can crash more demos than everybody else! :) |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 - Next |
