Looking at movetext() brought up the idea in my mind that an explicit scroll function might be the right thing to add to cc65 CONIO. And the quick idea of "let's just have both" simply doesn't fill the bill when looking into the implementation details. Of course those C written higher level functions don't perform as well as shrink wrapped ones from the C library but that seems nevertheless less problematic than "abusing" higher level C library functions for lower level tasks. I've been thinking about this once more and it seems to me that it's more appropriate to our resource limited machines to rather offer lower level, finer granularity functions that the user can than combine to build higher level functions from on his own. I am not sure what cpeekrevers() is or why it is necessary either (it was not in my original code/proposal and i dont remember it from the discussion).įortunately we don't depend on your memory let alone mine -) Better have it completely implemented from the start. Hmm, but if not all directions are implemented it would also need a return code to indicate "not implemented" or such. I think, at least, the function definitions needs an argument to indicate the direction. So it seems preferable to me to not mix those proposals in here.īut this PR implements a scroll() which can only scroll up. So it can as well go into another discussion - and this discussion:Ĭontains what is necessary for that Tetris project However I seem to understand that both proposals don't contradict what is under discussion here. Me neither :-) Let's ignore cpeeks() here. Regarding cpeeks() I personally can't say much because I personally understand neither the use case of cpeekc() nor cpeeks() well -) So you agree with a scroll() function capable of scrolling up or down? With an explicit scroll() the necessary code comes only in when needed. It's the very sweet spot between the current situation (no scrolling at all) and adding implicit scrolling to the output functions (considered to expensive). Maybe it wasn't expressed clearly enough but at least to me scroll() is something we want to do for sure.
I'll have to dig up the email or comment. I mentioned these things in the discussion then, but they were somehow ignored.
0 kommentar(er)
