Coding language
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 9:21 am
I know for some of you (TmEE, Kaneda, Stef, Fonz, ...) , but precisely ...
SpritesMind.Net
Sega Megadrive/Genesis development
http://gendev.spritesmind.net/forum/
Coding language
Page 1 of 3
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 10:19 am
i'm using asm only with snasm68k
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 10:59 am
Same here !!! I would have used BAX, but I couldn't get it running and I don't know C so ASM it is
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 2:03 pm
I'm currently using C (XGCC). A lot easier for me to understand for some reason.
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 2:11 pm
I haven't made much progress, but I was planning on ASM only.
Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 4:47 am
100% ASM baby. Oldskool-style.
Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:47 am
I did asm only for a long time. With Frog Feast, I switched to C with a lot of asm functions. Which is ironic, since I once said "I wouldn't even consider programming the Genesis in C".
It is much easier to do game logic and user interaction programming in C, and system level stuff in asm. And, it made the game a lot more portable. Once the low level stuff is written, the C stuff works with almost no changes.
Frog Feast isn't the best system for an action packed game, but could easily be modified to do it.
The biggest problem with the Frog Feast way is that it allows the game to control updates and stuff, it would be better if the system controlled the updates, and only called the C code for game logic and input.
It is much easier to do game logic and user interaction programming in C, and system level stuff in asm. And, it made the game a lot more portable. Once the low level stuff is written, the C stuff works with almost no changes.
Frog Feast isn't the best system for an action packed game, but could easily be modified to do it.
The biggest problem with the Frog Feast way is that it allows the game to control updates and stuff, it would be better if the system controlled the updates, and only called the C code for game logic and input.
Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 5:28 pm
I'm for a lot of C mixed with some ASM part (where insame optimisation is needed :p)
C is a more confortable language, cleaner and easier to read for almost people (well, not all obviously).
C is a more confortable language, cleaner and easier to read for almost people (well, not all obviously).
Posted: Mon Jan 08, 2007 9:03 pm
Same, i use C only... But for mad things like segacd bios jumping or rom header, i had to use ASM.
And Pascal may confirm that GCC generates a pretty fast code, probably as fast as ASM for average code, isn't it?
And Pascal may confirm that GCC generates a pretty fast code, probably as fast as ASM for average code, isn't it?
Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:37 am
yup, i confirm, GCC code generation is really impressive, even better than my poor asm code ^_^
Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:52 am
Well to be honest i don't think the GCC 68k code generation is that good.
It's correct but we can definitly do better job by hand on critical part and sometime we need to help C compiler (as the i = num; while(i--) {...}; for dbcc use)
Anyway i find it's sufficient in almost case. It's why i choose "a lot of C, litlle of ASM"
It's correct but we can definitly do better job by hand on critical part and sometime we need to help C compiler (as the i = num; while(i--) {...}; for dbcc use)
Anyway i find it's sufficient in almost case. It's why i choose "a lot of C, litlle of ASM"
Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:55 am
as i said i'm weak in asm ^_^ i only checked a single routineStef wrote:Well to be honest i don't think the GCC 68k code generation is that good.
It's correct but we can definitly do better job by hand on critical part and sometime we need to help C compiler (as the i = num; while(i--) {...}; for dbcc use)
Anyway i find it's sufficient in almost case. It's why i choose "a lot of C, litlle of ASM"
Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:37 am
Anyway as soon we know the tricks in C to help the compiler, generated code is efficient, not the best code but very good at leastPascal wrote:as i said i'm weak in asm ^_^ i only checked a single routineStef wrote:Well to be honest i don't think the GCC 68k code generation is that good.
It's correct but we can definitly do better job by hand on critical part and sometime we need to help C compiler (as the i = num; while(i--) {...}; for dbcc use)
Anyway i find it's sufficient in almost case. It's why i choose "a lot of C, litlle of ASM"
Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 9:15 am
+1Stef wrote:generated code is efficient, not the best code but very good at least :)
although I'm an ASM-only guy !!!
Where is Forth?
Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:11 am
Am I the only person who uses Forth? Low memory machines are where it really excels. If only I could get my compiler working... Oh well I just have to use asm for now. I can get the exact same results in asm anyway its just a pain in the ass, and not interactive. Do any emulators support keybords?