20-Apr-2024 09:40 GMT.		 UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 68 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 68]
[News] Project Petunia FAQANN.lu
Posted on 19-Aug-2002 15:25 GMT by Álmos Rajnai68 comments
View flat
View list

Project Petunia (AmigaOS4 JIT emulator) pages updated and extended with a FAQ.

Project Petunia pages (the emulator, that will be used in AmigaOS4) updated and extended with a FAQ.


After a long period of checking forums, chatboards and answering e-mails I decided to add a FAQ part into the project page. I hope I can clean up all the important questions arising in you. If something is not clear enough feel free to write a mail.


Project Petunia pages
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 1 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 19-Aug-2002 13:59 GMT
Nice to see thing comming along! :) Just one queston though, why no
MMU for the 040 emulation?
Keep up the good work. We are all looking very forward to getting the
opportunity to try it. :D
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 2 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by .john on 19-Aug-2002 14:49 GMT
Well, besides VMM (included natively in OS4) and Enforcer there is no real
application supporting the MMU.
Much worse is a missing FPU !
.john
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 3 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by PaulT on 19-Aug-2002 15:04 GMT
Comments directed at the author, but any other constructive comment is invited.
1) As far as it being part of OS4, great! 68K emulation is a must-have feature, obviously. But it seems strange to me that your effort, no matter how brilliant, is being depended on for such an important part of the OS. I can only hope that your wonderful programming accomplishment, done mostly by only one person, is not the reason for the delay of the release of OS4 and A1. In such a situation more money and programmers should have been put to work to move the project forward. This is only a criticism of those who are in charge of OS4, not of you! You are showing that even in today's world it is possible for a "lone gunman" to make a difference, this is great. But Amiga is falling further behind the real world every month.
2) You commented that, speed-wise, emulating an 060 on PPC233 should be possible. Well, when Apple went to PPC in 1994 or so, they had an emulator. On the 60 MHz 601 it was somewhat slower than a 68040 Mac. A 50MHz 060 is maybe twice or three times as fast as the 040's, but a PPC233 is much more than four times as fast as a 601. What is my point? That the emulator problem was solved, as far as pure 68040 code, in 1994. Why do you have to re-invent the wheel? (again, this is more of a criticism of Amiga management.)
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 4 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by strobe on 19-Aug-2002 15:47 GMT
Apple's 68k emulator wasn't a JIT.
Also, speaking as somebody who actually USED the product (as opposed to 3rd party information) I didn't get '040 performance out of my 68k apps until the 120mhz 604, at which point the emulator was also improved (also more system code was PPC native).
Nobody on the outside knows how much of AOS4 is PPC native. I'm not optimistic.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 5 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by z5 on 19-Aug-2002 16:12 GMT
one word: RESPECT
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 6 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by strobe on 19-Aug-2002 16:53 GMT
PS:
I hope this emulator is contributed to UAE. UAE's non-JIT 68k emulator is so slow it's not funny.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 7 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by JoannaK on 19-Aug-2002 17:07 GMT
It's a pitty there have to be at least 3 different 68kJit emulators on the works at the same time. But hey.. we all can afford reinventation of wheel, delays, lack of coders etc.. No need to share with others, even when they are years ahead of you. :)
I was honestly hoping they (Hyperion/Ainc) would use Bernies code to OS4 cause he have made this all once allready, and he's having working solution to most of issues... But apparently I was hoping too much.
OTOH Even I would not dare to expect Petunia maker asking help from that 'certain other' team allready having working 68k-jit emulator to PPC... :)
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 8 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 19-Aug-2002 17:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 7 (JoannaK):
JoannaK said,
>It's a pitty there have to be at least 3 different 68kJit emulators on the
>works at the same time. But hey.. we all can afford reinventation of wheel,
>delays, lack of coders etc.. No need to share with others, even when they are
>years ahead of you. :)
Well, it comes down to a difference of opinion. MOS sounds like it's going for the full-bore OS/2 solution (seperate VMs), while this "task-based" concept Petunia uses sounds suspiciously like the Win'95 approach. OS4 has always been positioned as the highly compatible route, so it makes some sense. (I'm not really sure how well I'm reading his description of the 'task-based' approach; it may be that he's saying this is a trick to achieve Win'9x-like compatibility while maintaining stability, or I could just be totally off on the way Win'9x handles its DOS boxes...)
I think I 'trust' the MOS approach more, personally, but since getting back in touch with oldschool games will be one of the few 'killer apps' for any "Amiga" platform at launch, I'm not going to mind too much. Unlike with DOS, there's actually 'Classic' software still worth running after you've moved to the 'modern' system. ;)
>I was honestly hoping they (Hyperion/Ainc) would use Bernies code to OS4 cause
>he have made this all once allready, and he's having working solution to most
>of issues... But apparently I was hoping too much.
Bernie's sounds as tuned to x86 as anything else out there on the UAE JIT front. It might take more effort to 'port' it than to simply write a new one for PPC. However, I gather that he's reimplemented some OS libraries to target x86, and that miiight mean some useful GCC cleanup/reimplementation work's been done there, if he wasn't handcoding assembler.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 9 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Hoggett on 19-Aug-2002 18:36 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
@ Joe "Floid" Kanowitz
" Bernie's sounds as tuned to x86 as anything else out there on the UAE JIT front. It might take more effort to 'port' it than to simply write a new one for PPC. However, I gather that he's reimplemented some OS libraries to target x86, and that miiight mean some useful GCC cleanup/reimplementation work's been done there, if he wasn't handcoding assembler."
He wasn't. :)
...but you're right. His code is x86 specific (all JIT compilers will be tuned to their target CPU, by their very nature), and it would have taken a considerable amount of work to do a PPC version. Of course, knowing some of the pitfalls in advance might have helped, but it would have been much more than a port. It's also likely it would have cost more getting Bernie to do it than using Petunia.
@ strobe
" I hope this emulator is contributed to UAE. UAE's non-JIT 68k emulator is so slow it's not funny."
Tricky. UAE is GPL, Petunia isn't.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 10 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Marcus Sundman on 19-Aug-2002 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 9 (Bill Hoggett):
> " I hope this emulator is contributed to UAE. UAE's non-JIT 68k
> emulator is so slow it's not funny."
>
> Tricky. UAE is GPL, Petunia isn't.
Uh.. so release Petunia under GPL. What's the problem?
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 11 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Hoggett on 19-Aug-2002 23:36 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (Marcus Sundman):
"Uh.. so release Petunia under GPL. What's the problem?"
There isn't any, except that there is no indication whatsoever that the author intends to do anything of the sort. As far as I can tell both Petunia and the MorphOS solution are going to be proprietary software.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 12 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Marcus Sundman on 20-Aug-2002 00:03 GMT
In reply to Comment 11 (Bill Hoggett):
Oh, I must have misunderstood what you meant by "Tricky. UAE is GPL, Petunia isn't." I thought you thought it'd be tricky for the author of Petunia to contribute its source code to UAE, but apparently you meant something else.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 13 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Nicolas Sallin on 20-Aug-2002 03:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
MorphOS doesn't use the approach you are describing.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 14 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by .john on 20-Aug-2002 04:59 GMT
In reply to Comment 7 (JoannaK):
Has it ever crossed your mind, that a CPU emulation is extremly CPU dependant ?
Meaning, that there is no much use in 'porting' x86-host code to PPC-host code.
A new system tailored (because targeted) to this 'other' host-CPU is much more
realistic.
To port would mean here to off-line emulate. Why I am saying this ?
I admit this seesm esotheric but have a look:
Porting a x86 program to PPC is easy these days. You change some source parts,
modify instructions.
But we are talking native code here ! I mean, we'd need to port x86 instruction-SET
to PPC-instruction-SET. An emulator just does this: Translating (in this case)
68K instruction-SET to x86 instruction-SET. Now translating the x86 instruction-
SET to PPC instruction-SET comes equal to an offline insource emulation.
This just can't be optimal.
.john
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 15 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by .john on 20-Aug-2002 05:01 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
I doubt you will be able to run many of the Classic Amiga games on OS4.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 16 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 20-Aug-2002 05:28 GMT
In reply to Comment 13 (Nicolas Sallin):
Nicolas Sallin said,
>MorphOS doesn't use the approach you are describing.
Yep. Beg pardon, I should've learned how to read. In fact, I think I read a few things backwards about Petunia, too, so rather than wedge my foot in my mouth here, I'll do as suggested and ask directly in email. :}
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 17 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 20-Aug-2002 05:39 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (Joe "Floid" Kanowitz):
Actually it's quite the opposite.
The task-based approach used by OS 4 will no doubt result in less compatibility to some degree.
OTOH system compliant 68K applications will be able to make use of some of the new kernel's functionality such as VM.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 18 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Álmos Rajnai on 20-Aug-2002 06:23 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (PaulT):
To tell you the truth: there is no more money, no more resources for
AOS4 development, Amiga Inc. has very limited financial
possibilities.
Hopefully not. Amigans are very excited about AOS4, almost everybody
waiting for it. The rest of the world is rather neutral, you can
probably notice: Apple with far much better financial resources could
not hit Windows and PCs, what could WE do?
Amiga is a hobby machine for a quite long time, and I don't think
that it will significantly change the world. But I love it, as many
others do too.
Have you ever tried the MacOS 68k emulator? :)
It is much slower than often idealized by Mac fans. It could never
reached the speed of 040/25 on a 603/166.
Besides do you think that Apple would sell the emulator to Amiga
Inc., and AInc. could have the money for it?
Petunia is a lot faster than Apple's emulator, I can guarantee.
(Apple is always employing designers and PR-managers instead of
programmers... Okay, just a joke... ;)
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 19 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Álmos Rajnai on 20-Aug-2002 06:41 GMT
In reply to Comment 18 (Álmos Rajnai):
Ah... My post seems a bit weird w/o az original text, so once again:
> only one person, is not the reason for the delay of the release of OS4 and
> A1. In such a situation more money and programmers should have been put to
> work to move the project forward. This is only a criticism of those who
> are in charge of OS4, not of you! You are showing that even in today's
To tell you the truth: there is no more money, no more resources for
AOS4 development, Amiga Inc. has very limited financial
possibilities.
> world it is possible for a "lone gunman" to make a difference, this is
> great. But Amiga is falling further behind the real world every month.
Hopefully not. Amigans are very excited about AOS4, almost everybody
waiting for it. The rest of the world is rather neutral, you can
probably notice: Apple with far much better financial resources could
not hit Windows and PCs, what could WE do?
Amiga is a hobby machine for a quite long time, and I don't think
that it will significantly change the world. But I love it, as many
others do too.
> 2) You commented that emulating an 060 on PPC233 should be possible. Well,
> when Apple went to PPC in 1994 or so, they had an emulator. On the 60 MHz
> 601 it was somewhat slower than a 68040 Mac. A 50MHz 060 is maybe twice as
> fast as the 040's, but a PPC233 is more than four times as fast as a 601.
> What is my point? That the emulator problem was solved, as far as pure
> 68040 code, in 1994. Why do you have to re-invent the wheel?
Have you ever tried the MacOS 68k emulator? :)
It is much slower than often idealized by Mac fans. It could never
reached the speed of 040/25 on a 603/166.
Besides do you think that Apple would sell the emulator to Amiga
Inc., and AInc. could have the money for it?
Petunia is a lot faster than Apple's emulator, I can guarantee.
(Apple is always employing designers and PR-managers instead of
programmers... Okay, just a joke... Isn't it? ;)
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 20 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Alfred Schwarz on 20-Aug-2002 06:52 GMT
In reply to Comment 2 (.john):
> Much worse is a missing FPU !
It seems you didn't read the FAQ:
"I plan to add FPU support before the initial public release."
Ciao, Alfred
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 21 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Mark Smith on 20-Aug-2002 07:49 GMT
Nice to see things are moving along, but why is only one person working on the project ?
Top marks to him for being able to cope, but surely if Amiga Inc are serious about getting OS4 off the ground then they need to get some developers ? What happens if Almos gets run over by a bus ? Or has his computer stolen ? Or gets washed away in a flood. Also is Almos working on this full time or owrking on it in his spare time while he goes to his real job during the day ?
Just seems that Amiga Inc are sitting down and waiting for others to finish all the bits and bobs and then hope it'll mesh together at the end of the day.
Not trying to critise anyones work but it just looks to me as though Amiga Inc. are treating OS4 as a "MegaDemo" with coders dotted all over the globe and then hoping to stitch it together :-(
Regards
Mark
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 22 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by priest on 20-Aug-2002 07:51 GMT
In reply to Comment 15 (.john):
>I doubt you will be able to run many of the Classic Amiga games on OS4.
Why?
Or did you mean "AmigaOne" instead of OS4?
Even AmigaOne+OS4 should run OS3.x games that use RTG & AHI.
Amiga3000&A4000+CSPPC+OS4 should run also some ECS/AGA games. Right?
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 23 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by JoannaK on 20-Aug-2002 08:07 GMT
In reply to Comment 20 (Alfred Schwarz):
Problem with this Petunia thing is that we (OK. I... I just assume other feels the same) don't know about it enough to belive into it happening. And unfortunately that web page does little to help... Those missing parts of emulation system (like working callbacks and FPU/MMU) does not sound too promicing.
In my estimation of time schedules Patunia should be ready by now to be integrated and tested before OS4 is supposed to be released byt the end of this year (as some of us have expected). I understand these peoples (around OS4) are workin on blind cause they have not done this level of stuff before but IMHO getting some modules done is nowere close of final product working. It's going to take a lot of testing and tweaking before it finally works well together.
Good thing there is progress, though.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 24 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 20-Aug-2002 08:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 23 (JoannaK):
It's ofcourse complete nonsense to clamor for 68K MMU emulation on PPC.
AmigaOS doesn't really make use of the 68K's MMU.
You'd loose only a handful of programs, most of which will be rendered redundant by OS 4 anyway (like VMM for instance) or will need to be rewritten anyway.
With respect to FPU emulation, that too is in my book of rather little importance.
There are very few programs on the Amiga that will only work on FPU equipped machines.
If you bear in mind that even some BlizzardPPC's were shipped with FPU less 68040's, the reason for this becomes immediately obvious.
Finally it should be noted that Àlmos has been working on Petunia since late 2000 (!) so it's hardly like he just started yesterday.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 25 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 20-Aug-2002 09:46 GMT
In reply to Comment 24 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
"When will the FPU work?
After the emulation will work properly in the integrated form I
concentrate on the FPU. (Or when I will have more time for it.)
I plan to add FPU support before the initial public release."
So which is it? FPU or no FPU? Surely you must know it by now,
since OS4 is almost ready...
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 26 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Jon on 20-Aug-2002 09:49 GMT
@Hyperion folks
How far has the integration gone? Can you already run emulated M68K code in parallel with PPC programs?
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 27 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 20-Aug-2002 10:30 GMT
Here's few thoughts and questions:
I would like to know how does AmigaOS4 work without 68k emulation or is there still some critical part(s) in 68k?
I think it's great to have a simple emulation layer for existing OS friendly software if those software will benefit from PPC code (Eg.VM...).
I wonder how easy is it to upgrade ExecSG for new stuff like upgraded 68k emulation? Is it just a library, a kernel module or what?
It's better to let UAEJIT handle old A500 and A1200 games.
I would like to have progress report for driver situation...which GFX card to buy...Radeon 9700? ;)
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 28 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by priest on 20-Aug-2002 11:17 GMT
In reply to Comment 27 (Anonymous):
I hope those questions will go into the FAQ that Hyperion is putting up...
The next few answers I have gathered from the net during the past few months, so I might be wrong, but anyway:
>I wonder how easy is it to upgrade ExecSG for new stuff like upgraded 68k emulation? Is it just a library, a kernel module or what?
I think the 68k emulation is not built into the kernel, it's a separate task.
(perhaps separate task per every 68k application?????)
>It's better to let UAEJIT handle old A500 and A1200 games.
I understood it so that this OS4 68kJIT might be possible to be used with UAE, someday...
>I would like to have progress report for driver situation...which GFX card to buy...Radeon 9700? ;)
Last time I heard about it, Radeon8500 might be the latest supported card, even though all effects will not be used untill Warp3D is upgraded in later AmigaOS release.
(IIRC, Radeon9700 costs 2* more than Radeon8500. And Radeon8500 costs 2* more than Radeon7200... And untill Radeon8500 can be fully utilized, it's price will drop 1/2.... so ... better start with Radeon7x00 series card, you most likely done not loose $ in the long run.)
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 29 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Kjetil on 20-Aug-2002 11:30 GMT
Many on this news board think that ExecCG will provide lots of things it can’t,
ExecCG can not provide memory protection to program not ware of memory protection, ExecCG can not provide routines for 68k that the 68k program is not a were off, meaning shore it is possible to have memory protection on new 68k programs, butt not old ones, so it is meaning less to impalement it, as the 68k programs are dead, or at least do not have same bright future as PPC has. So start porting your old programs, they my not work on the new AmigaOS4.0 while more may work in OS4.2 when more MMU and otter tings are added.
The only thing I can think of is that benefit of Exec emulation core, giving the advantage of fast PPC runtime when executing ExecCG core. This depends heavily on if the Exec emulation make use of the new OS or not.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 30 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Don Cox on 20-Aug-2002 11:57 GMT
In reply to Comment 21 (Mark Smith):
"Just seems that Amiga Inc are sitting down and waiting for others to finish all the bits and bobs and then
hope it'll mesh together at the end of the day.
Not trying to critise anyones work but it just looks to me as though Amiga Inc. are treating OS4 as a
"MegaDemo" with coders dotted all over the globe and then hoping to
stitch it together :-( "
It's nothing to do with Amiga Inc. They are working on the DE.
AmigaOS 4 development is organised by Hyperion, on a rather small
budget. I would say they are lucky to find even one programmer
prepared to write a JIT emulator.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 31 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 20-Aug-2002 11:59 GMT
old antique machines
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 32 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Bill T. on 20-Aug-2002 12:32 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (PaulT):
>That the emulator problem was solved, as far as pure 68040 code, in 1994. Why do you have to re-invent the wheel?
Yea, it was invented and refined by *APPLE* back then. What good does that do us?Do you honestly think Apple would
share that with us? At a licensing fee that the entire remaining Amiga userbase could pay for?
The Amiga developers HAVE TO reinvent this wheel, as Apple's solution will not be useful to us
in Amiga land. It's a pity the MorphOS and Petunia (and anyone else I don't know about)
don't collaborate, share ideas, and make one 68K emulation for PPC to be shared, but
the business side of things don't tend to work that way, for similar reasons that they
don't work to get us the Apple emulator.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 33 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Toner on 20-Aug-2002 12:42 GMT
In reply to Comment 28 (priest):
>>I would like to have progress report for driver situation...which GFX card to buy...Radeon 9700? ;)
Wait until the OS is released. Cards will most likely be cheaper then anyway, especially
with the 9700 so close to shipment, the older cards will drop in price by the time you
get OS4. Progress is, uh, progressing. :) A list of specific supported cards will be provided
by the time you'd need it.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 34 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Nicolas Sallin on 20-Aug-2002 17:36 GMT
In reply to Comment 24 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
If I translate what you just said:
"Not a single 68k application using Warp3D will work under AmigaOS4
because they all use FPU."
BTW, they work under MorphOS.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 35 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Jon on 20-Aug-2002 18:08 GMT
In reply to Comment 34 (Nicolas Sallin):
I wonder what would be that Warp3D app for M68K that we would miss, when we can run it natively?
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 36 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by PaulT on 20-Aug-2002 18:28 GMT
In reply comments 6 and 32:
Apple's original 68K emulator was not JIT. However, by 1997 both Apple's and Connectix's emulators (latter referred to as Speed Doubler) were referred to in the press as using Dynamic Recompilation (1). I think that this was also the term that DEC used for its Alpha-platform x86 emulator.
As far as Apple, or Connectix, selling their emulator code, why the hell not? They're not making those companies any money any more! Get some more milk out of that cow! Is that going to cost Apple lots of Mac sales? Heck no. I say, explore ANY chance to get the A1 out sooner. Unfortunately it looks like A,Inc is pretty much broke. Making it look like it was a good idea to outsource the hardware.... :(
(1) http://www.atpm.com/3.05/page14.shtml
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 37 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 20-Aug-2002 20:12 GMT
In reply to Comment 36 (PaulT):
Thats nonsense, only because something doesnt earn immediate money one doesnt sell it cheaply to a possible competitor.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 38 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 20-Aug-2002 20:17 GMT
In reply to Comment 34 (Nicolas Sallin):
> If I translate what you just said:
> "Not a single 68k application using Warp3D will work under AmigaOS4
> because they all use FPU."
Thats not translating, thats making something up. That a program *can* use a fpu doenst it mean it *must*. That a program uses floating point at all doesnt mean it uses a fpu. Unless Warp3d only worked on fpu eqiupped machines.
> BTW, they work under MorphOS.
Who cares. Neither MorphOS nor AmigaOS is released and Petunia is not finished.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 39 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Hammer on 20-Aug-2002 23:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 18 (Álmos Rajnai):
> The rest of the world is rather neutral, you can
> probably notice: Apple with far much better financial resources could
> not hit Windows and PCs, what could WE do?
Can you licence MacOS X for third party hardware?
I don't think Apple's experiences can be applied for the AmigaOS.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 40 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Álmos Rajnai on 21-Aug-2002 07:35 GMT
In reply to Comment 38 (Anonymous):
Don't be afraid, every PPC-based Warp3D progams will run under AmigaOS4. (Hopefully 68k-based too.) The 68k version of Warp3D libs are using the FPU that is why it cannot be started on an FPU-less 68k machine.
As I wrote: the final release of AOS4 will have FPU emulation. My page shows the ACTUAL state of the emulator, to show you the progressing.
I cannot understand people. If I develop in silence, everybody claims about vaporware, if I publish info about the progress, everybody cries up for yet missing parts. I am not angry, I am sad.
As I wrote in the FAQ: AOS4 will simpy rock. Don't try always finding why it would be wrong in one or two aspects, there will be tons of new features which were missing for a very long time.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 41 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 21-Aug-2002 09:13 GMT
In reply to Comment 40 (Álmos Rajnai):
Thanks about comments Álmos...Keep doing a good work! :)
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 42 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 21-Aug-2002 09:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 34 (Nicolas Sallin):
Brilliant comment.
We're obviously going to recompile Warp3D for OS 4 so that's fully native and won't make use of the 68K.
FPU or otherwise.
You've spent many months decompiling Warp3D to come up with your own clone for MorphOS and this is the extent of your expertise?
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 43 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Nicholai Benalal on 21-Aug-2002 09:31 GMT
In reply to Comment 42 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
Nobody decompiled warp3. I wonder where you got that one from.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 44 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Don Cox on 21-Aug-2002 09:32 GMT
In reply to Comment 40 (Álmos Rajnai):
A good test for the FPU emulation is the test project for Imagine
here:
http://www.cadtech.demon.co.uk/general/011107-haze_bench.lzx
It showed up some bugs in Bernie's emulator (now fixed).
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 45 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Jon on 21-Aug-2002 10:05 GMT
In reply to Comment 40 (Álmos Rajnai):
Almos (sorry): not everyone :) I believe that the most readers are just quiet and waiting..
Keep up the good work!
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 46 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by anon on 21-Aug-2002 11:50 GMT
In reply to Comment 43 (Nicholai Benalal):
Don't care for benny. That's just his usual bullshit talk. Best is to ignore this belgian.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 47 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Nicolas Sallin on 21-Aug-2002 11:52 GMT
In reply to Comment 42 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
You think floating point datas are prepared without making use of the
FPU ? Of course this is possible... but only a few applications
do that, if any. It's not like fixed point datas.
Before saying it's only possible to know that after decompilation of
many programms, better ask the nearest coder you know.
So, without FPU emulation, replacing a 68k library by a PPC one will
not help running ayny 68k Warp3D applications making use of FPU.
I wonder how OS4 coders can follow you when you write such broken
statements.
Why did you say FPU emulation was of little importance when you
obviously have no clue about what you are talking ?
If Almos Rajnai wants to add it before the release, it's for
a reason.
Why do you continue mispelling names ? It's Almos (with an accent when
available, not a tild), not Aelmos.
Why do you always say everything is done by decompilation ?
Because Hyperion works like that or just because you know nothing to
software developpement ?
When will you stop spreading lies ?
Why do you never say "Sorry, I misunderstood." or "Sorry, I
overlooked the thing." ?
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 48 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Jon on 21-Aug-2002 14:14 GMT
In reply to Comment 47 (Nicolas Sallin):
Dear Nicolas,
Is there any Warp3D application for M68K, which we can't run natively on the PPC? I believe that there's a WarpOS version of every remarkable one.
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 49 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by Nicolas Sallin on 21-Aug-2002 15:09 GMT
In reply to Comment 48 (Jon):
Speaking about 68k Warp3D apps was maybe the only way to show how the
"FPU emulation is of little importance" sentence was biased and wrong.
But you can look into the Warp3D archive on Aminet to see some 68k
only apps.
Anyway, instead of saying nonsense about FPU emu, someone with a clue
would immediately remember than some important Amiga applications are
68k and FPU only.
Painters, Modelers, etc...
Even if only one major Amiga application was FPU only, it would make
sense to support it.
But try explaining that to a belgium lawyer who always wants to be
right...
Project Petunia FAQ : Comment 50 of 68ANN.lu
Posted by JoannaK on 21-Aug-2002 19:08 GMT
In reply to Comment 49 (Nicolas Sallin):
"Even if only one major Amiga application was FPU only, it would make
sense to support it."
Althugh it's not essential part like callback it's good to have cause there are plenty programs made to take adwantage of FPU.. But FPU can be implemented later, it's not the as critical for first release.
"But try explaining that to a belgium lawyer who always wants to be
right... "
I just got this slightly twisted idea... How about suing him? *Why?* I dont't know,, but why not.. It seems to be open season around Amiga anyhow, why should he be left alone on this :)
Anonymous, there are 68 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 68]
Back to Top