home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   comp.sys.cbm      Discussion about Commodore micros      53,866 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 52,195 of 53,866   
   wwww.leser@gmail.com to All   
   Re: Short ML Program   
   02 Mar 18 10:02:03   
   
   This newsgroup used to be entertaining! Where's all the fun gone?   
   Let me try some:   
      
   Try to imagine you didn't already have an idea as to how fast machine language   
   can be as compared to BASIC. Would Jim Butterfield's demonstration have   
   convinced you that it is worth the while learning how to do computer   
   programming in assembly language?    
   He assures us that BASIC could never fill the screen at the same rate as his   
   assembly program does, and that's certainly true. But is the difference really   
   as great as it appears from the video?   
      
   10 print chr$(19);   
   20 get a$   
   30 for i=1 to 7   
   40 a$=a$+a$   
   60 next   
   70 a$=left$(a$,111)   
   80 print a$;a$;a$;a$;a$;a$;a$;a$;a$;   
   90 if left$(a$,1)<>":" then 10   
      
   Can you improve upon my program above, or rewrite it, to make it run faster?   
   Would you take a different approach, like the following?   
      
   10 printchr$(147)   
   20 co=53248:ca=8448:ir=56334   
   30 fori=0to7:poke8192+32*8+i,0:next   
   40 poke53272,24   
   50 poke198,0:wait198,1:get a$   
   60 pb=co+8*(asc(a$)-64)   
   70 pokeir,peek(ir)and254:poke1,peek(1)and251   
   80 fori=0to7:pokeca+i,peek(pb+i):next   
   90 poke1,peek(1)or4:pokeir,peek(ir)or1   
   100 if a$<>":"then 50   
   110 poke53272,21   
      
   (Line 60 needs some work.)   
      
   Besides that, did you notice that Jim Butterfield's assembly program, too, can   
   be improved upon, speed-wise? Here's a hint: Most monitors' mnemonic-to-opcode   
   translators won't even let you not do the improvement (but VICE's monitor   
   will.)   
      
   Another oddity that's apparent from the video hasn't been mentioned yet: Jim   
   Butterfield's machine does not exhibit the Commodore 64's standard character   
   set. It looks more like the VIC-20(or PET?)'s character set to me. Did Jim   
   Butterfield use a    
   modified machine? Could that account somehow for the curious fact that the   
   very last character on screen remains blank?   
      
   Chris   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca