> Is anyone aware of problems with the Sound Blaster PCI 512 and allegro
> drivers? My New 512 has horrible midi playback, (havent had a chance to
> test .wavs), and it seems to be doing horrible things to my game
> speed. Does anyone know of a patch or does this card just suck?
The design is certainly known to suck for a good many tasks.
Mainly because all the Soundblaster compatability is done in software
using a port-trapping algorithm that needs EMM386 or other VCPI to work.
An ISA SB16-class card is probably the best option (I believe they are
still in production under the name 'waveffects'), failing that an
Aureal Vortex-2 is probably best. But know that the Vortex-2 has a
conflict with CWSDPMI which screws Allegro programs if they aren't
run in Windows. This can be cured by using WDOSX to replace CWSDPMI.
The Vortex-2 also lacks MIDI support in DOS, but it can take a
wavetable daughterboard, which solves that problem too.
JP Morris - aka DOUG the Eagle (Dragon) -=UDIC=- doug@...
Fun things to do with the Ultima games (http://www.it-he.org)
Developing a U6/U7 clone (http://fly.to/ire)
d+++ e+ N+ T++ Om U1234!56!7'!S'!8!9!KA u++ uC+++ uF+++ uG---- uLB----
uA--- nC+ nR---- nH+++ nP++ nI nPT nS nT wM- wC- y a(YEAR - 1976)
>From <allegro-owner@...> Sat May 20 20:06:09 2000
Received: from mail_2.funcow [220.127.116.11] by canvaslink.com with ESMTP
(SMTPD32-6.00) id A86E827A00D8; Sat, 20 May 2000 20:06:06 -0400
Received: by mail_2.funcow from localhost
(router,SLMail V3.2); Sat, 20 May 2000 20:05:04 +0100
Received: from mail.funcow.com [18.104.22.168]
by mail_2.funcow [22.214.171.124] (SLmail 3.2.3113) with ESMTP
for <allegro@...>; Sat, 20 May 2000 20:05:04 0100
Received: by mail.funcow.com from localhost
(router,SLMail V4.0); Sat, 20 May 2000 20:05:15 -0400
Received: from ultima [126.96.36.199]
by mail.funcow.com [188.8.131.52] (SLmail 4.0.3315) with SMTP
for <allegro@...>; Sat, 20 May 2000 20:05:14 -0400
From: "Kevin Lang" <ultima@...>
Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 19:59:49 -0400
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
Subject: Re: [AL] Working out angles
I would use floating point. It's more accurate, and you won't really
encounter any speed loss unless you literally are keeping track of millions
of objects, in which case fixed point might be a better choice.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew R. Gillett" <arg@...>
To: "Allegro Mailing List" <allegro@...>
Sent: Saturday, May 20, 2000 5:07 PM
Subject: [AL] Working out angles
> I'm writing a little piece of code to make an object move across the
> at a given angle (and work out the angle between the object and a target).
> probably did this stuff at school, but I must have forgotten it
> after being told it.
> sine_counter holds the angle:
> x_pos += fixtoi (fsin (sine_counter) * speed);
> y_pos += fixtoi (fcos (sine_counter) * speed);
> This is the only piece of code which seems to work properly. For the rest
> (working out the angle between two things) I looked up some old
> on this mailing list on the same subject, but I couldn't get it to work.
> Also, should I be using fixed, fix or double as the units I measure these
> things in?