Screen 4 - vram usage

Enlighted (6213)

01-12-2022, 01:32

pizzapower wrote:

That's incredibly rude. I said I don't care about the wiki so as not to sound inconsistent with my current position, but it looks like I stepped on someone's toes. So, yeah, YOU DO CARE. Or you wouldn't be so rude as to compare people to animals. I think the moderators should know about your rudeness.

From the beginning, you attack people instead of giving arguments. Then you pretend to be shocked because I don't care that you denigrate the work that has been done in the wiki. You are ridiculous.

By pizzapower

Master (165)

01-12-2022, 03:22

gdx wrote:

From the beginning, you attack people instead of giving arguments.

I think you have me confused with someone else.

引用:

Then you pretend to be shocked because I don't care that you denigrate the work that has been done in the wiki. You are ridiculous.

Can you point out the comment where I attacked you or anyone personally? On the other hand, I think I don't want to know. If you think that me telling you that I don't agree with a couple of articles in the wiki is to somehow denigrate it. But telling people they are livestock is on par somehow. 🤷

By gdx

Enlighted (6213)

01-12-2022, 08:56

Yes I can.

pizzapower wrote:

That is absurd.

pizzapower wrote:

Name tables don't exist, except when they do. Anyway, it's all a figment of your imagination.

pizzapower wrote:

Things are just "ridiculous" and don't work in a "reasonable way".

pizzapower wrote:

This would be unnecessarily confusing and stupid. Why should you go out of your way just to avoid calling it what it is.

Doesn't that mean we're stupid, even that we are delirious, not to use the term page?

As for me, I don't use the term "abstraction" and I prefer to say that the VDP works based on tables and registers, but i'm not saying it's stupid to talk about pages.

By Micha

Expert (103)

01-12-2022, 09:08

It's exciting to see that VDP-design decisisions made 4 decades ago can lead to such an hefty debate.
But what triggers my interest is: why would the designers of the VDP have made the choices they did? Backwards compatibility? Technical reasons in terms of speed? Time pressure? Anyone has an idea?

By gdx

Enlighted (6213)

01-12-2022, 09:33

I intervened just because I found it interesting to talk about different points of view.

To answer your questioni don't think this is backwards compatibility, but they wanted to maintain continuity in the general mode of operation. At the time, the TMS99xx was a popular VDP. Nishi wanted to use it as a base for it. According to what he says we should have had v9938 from the MSX1 (probably a less evolved v9938: without screen7 nor 8) but it came too late.

By ro

Scribe (4963)

01-12-2022, 11:11

Metalion wrote:

Personnally, I am stunned (to say the least) at the utter and complete absence of moderation on this thread ! This stupid and useless semantic war has been going on for almost 2 weeks now, and absolutely no one did something to stop it.

I understand why you feel admins are absent, in a way. I have been here all along. I'm not the admin that will moderate on each and every little thing, I'm that gentle referee. Or perhaps not even that. We're all adults here, and sometimes a discussion heats up. No big deal. I'm sure we are all in it for the right reasons.

It's easy to evolve this (or any other topic) to a higher level; keep on discussing ideas, not people or events.

You've seen me contribute here to push forwards, not to stop a discussion.

2cents. Hope this will work for you Next round is on me

By pizzapower

Master (165)

01-12-2022, 14:24

gdx wrote:

Yes I can.

pizzapower wrote:

That is absurd.

I suspected you wouldn't know what a personal attack is. And I was right. I stand by what I said, which was:

引用:

Because the VDP has no means of using a register directly and in the way YOU prescribe, it cannot be a part of the hardware specification? That is absurd.

That's not a personal attack. You know what else is absurd? You considering that a personal attack.

引用:

pizzapower wrote:

Name tables don't exist, except when they do. Anyway, it's all a figment of your imagination.

Not a personal attack. You might not like humour, but that is another story.

引用:

pizzapower wrote:

Things are just "ridiculous" and don't work in a "reasonable way".

Putting things out of context seems to be a recurring strategy you like to use. That was me quoting PingPong.

引用:

pizzapower wrote:

This would be unnecessarily confusing and stupid. Why should you go out of your way just to avoid calling it what it is.

Doesn't that mean we're stupid, even that we are delirious, not to use the term page?

No. I said it before and I will say this again: what was stupid and confusing was the convoluted way *I* was describing R#2 to prove a point, which was:

引用:

R#2 is the name table base address. But in new modes G4 to G7:

in G4, the name table doesn't use byte-to-tile mapping, but one byte to two points mapping.
in G5, the name table doesn't use byte-to-tile mapping, but one byte to four points mapping.
in G7, the name table doesn't use byte-to-tile mapping, but one byte to one point mapping.
colours are not separated in a different table, they are there in the name table too.
patterns are not separated in a different table, they are there in the name table too.
It also defines the beginning of a visible page. The page has a resolution of 256x256 (G4, G7) or 512x256 (G5, G6), which is used along with the vertical scroll register to expose it completely.
You can no longer use flexible base addresses to put the name table anywhere you want with a 1K granularity, they are fixed in equally spaced memory er... pages.
The visible page matches 1-to-1 the memory page defined above.

This would be unnecessarily confusing and stupid.

You have nothing, gdx. What you have shown me instead is that you don't have a skin thick enough to debate things online. 🤷

By gdx

Enlighted (6213)

01-12-2022, 15:05

pizzapower wrote:

Not a personal attack.

Why do you say that ? Nothing says I think that. You asked the following question.

pizzapower wrote:

Can you point out the comment where I attacked you or ANYONE personally?

So I answered.

pizzapower wrote:

What you have shown me instead is that you don't have a skin thick enough to debate things online.

Very funny. I explained how VDP works and you just quote documentation where it says "page".

By PingPong

Enlighted (4136)

01-12-2022, 15:04

gdx wrote:

Yes I can.

pizzapower wrote:

That is absurd.

pizzapower wrote:

Name tables don't exist, except when they do. Anyway, it's all a figment of your imagination.

pizzapower wrote:

Things are just "ridiculous" and don't work in a "reasonable way".

pizzapower wrote:

This would be unnecessarily confusing and stupid. Why should you go out of your way just to avoid calling it what it is.

Doesn't that mean we're stupid, even that we are delirious, not to use the term page?

As for me, I don't use the term "abstraction" and I prefer to say that the VDP works based on tables and registers, but i'm not saying it's stupid to talk about pages.

I agree. this is the typical people that first attack or insult (indirectly) others people, then, after their replies, blame they are rude, then they proclaim that had not attacked anyone

By PingPong

Enlighted (4136)

01-12-2022, 15:07

gdx wrote:

pizzapower wrote:

Not a personal attack.

Why do you say that ? Nothing says I think that. You asked the following question.

pizzapower wrote:

Can you point out the comment where I attacked you or ANYONE personally?

So I answered.

pizzapower wrote:

What you have shown me instead is that you don't have a skin thick enough to debate things online.

Very funny. I explained how VDP works and you just quote documentation where it says "page".

NOT VERY FUNNY! Increbibly funny is a more appropriate term.