Re: LZ: PSOII Libraries
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: LZ: PSOII Libraries
Micah/Richard Brodsky wrote:
> The MAJOR disadvantage to PSOII is that programs DO have to have overhead.
> About 50 bytes of it per program. If, however, remapping of ~30 CALLs or JPs
> in the program is accomplished (not too hard. I got ~70 in ZD-Bug), that space
> is made up for. This will not apply to USGARD, since it remaps automatically.
> The only use for PSOII with USGARD is that its libraries will be compatible
> with other shells.
But think how much more you would save it that overlay was in a shell instead...
> >Save two bytes when making a CALL_? Good luck :)
>
> No extra good luck necessary. If I haven't miscalculated, I should have that
> up and running by tonight.
A CALL_ takes 5 bytes, a plain call takes 3 bytes. Somehow, you intend to convert
a CALL_ to an ordinary call WITHOUT ADDING _ANYTHING_ else to the source. The
only way to do this is to move your program to a fixed location.
> So why were people yelling about them so much? At any rate, at a loss of ~50
> bytes per program using a PSOII library, if a library's used once, what's soo
> bad? And if it's used twice, all the better.
Yes, I agree with you, but many don't :-/ They think a game should be _ONE_
file (Macinstosh style) - when transfering stuff between two calcs, you
shouldn't have to figure out what more files to send etc etc. That's the big
deal I think (?)
--
Jimmy Mårdell "Searching for shelter
mailto:mja@algonet.se My brain is on ice
http://www.algonet.se/~mja I'm scared of my own thoughts
IRC: Yarin I can hear them cry" /Leather Strip
References: