|Re: [hatari-devel] Hatari screen options (was: Hatari manual.html)|
[ Thread Index |
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/hatari-devel Archives
On torstai 06 maaliskuu 2014, David Savinkoff wrote:
> ----- Eero Tamminen <oak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Your patch breaks max width limit.
> Yes. Making the screen wider by 16 may exceed what the user
> requested. This patch Must break the max width limit in some
> instances in order to perform its function. This means that MaxW
> can be exceeded by 16.
> Is it critical that --max-width be strictly adhered to ?
That's one the main points of it, restrict the maximum size
of framebuffer Hatari requests from SDL (to prevent crashes
with certain SDL versions on certain types of devices).
For that purpuse it would normally be set in global Hatari
configuration (or hard-coded in configuration.c).
Additionally, user may use it to select more suitable window size
(very useful for Falcon emulation), or to limit ST emulation screen
size to make screen conversion faster on slow machines.
There just isn't enough space in SDL GUI to have separate options
> Can --max-width be redefined to be Requested width --req-width ?
> > With it "--max-width 660 --max-height 440" gives "672 x 440"
> > resolution and "--max-width 330 --max-height 240" gives "336 x 240"
> > resolution.
> Note that --max-width 640 --max-height 440 could be used instead
> of --max-width 660 --max-height 440 to get what you were looking for.
> The patch performed its function by making the Right border 16 pixels
> wider than the zero width Left border.
> I hope that 660x440 is provided as an example, not as something that
> has been in use. I noticed that Hatari defaults to 832x324, which is
> not impacted by the patch.
> You should try the ST_EARTH demo in 832x324 vs 800x600,
> and 416x312 vs 400x300 to see the better utilization of the screen.
> Here, 832x324 and 416x312 are not impacted by the patch, whereas,
> 800x600 and 400x300 are. Note that the video mode in this demo is
> a spectrum512 type. To see how 800x600 and 400x300 were impacted
> by the patch, compare with 768x600 and 384x300.
> > PS. it's easiest to test your fixed patch in windowed mode.
> I looked at the patch in windowed mode. The way to avoid
> odd looking windows (with, or without the patch) is to select
> a Max-Width that looks best. This patch gives you more
For simplicity's sake it's better that things look OK always,
user doesn't need to test/guess how he gets the ugly white
> I'm hoping that Max-Width could be defined as Selected-Width
> because Max-Width excludes the functionality of the patch.
Nobody else has asked for it, and as it's just a one-liner,
it may be simpler if you just apply it to your own builds. :-)