Is safe use picasso96 routines in AmigaOS4.1? and CybergraphicsX in MorphOS3.7? or what is os native way use 24bit graphics. i think i have somewheresome example for MOS.

@Vanhapolle

It's safe to use Picasso96 and CybergraphicsX for OS4.x .

Quote:

or what is os native way use 24bit graphics

For older OS4.x versions this would be Picasso96, starting with OS4.1 Final it's graphics.library.

@ZeroG

I hope they support still 8bit modes.(my main ideas dont need them actally i can say them dont with them without much addinational work even after this not so nicely). i hope they give documentation use this Final edition way same time when they release Final edition becousei want codesoon as i can.

@Vanhapolle

4.1 Final Edition will need to have a compatibility layer with P96 so that it doesn't break older software, so you can use P96 for now until the SDK is updated, and then change to the new graphics.library if you need to.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought CGX and P96 both provided compatibility with each other's API, so you should be able to use either and have the code work on both systems.

_________________
RobTheNerd.com | InstallerGen | SMBMounter | Atoms-X

@Daedalus

CGX does not have P96 API emulation so you must use CGX API on CGX systems.

_________________
Amiga Developer
Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook

@itix

Fair enough, so the best bet would be to use CGX to start with because that code should work on all systems, and then add a native P96/graphics.library version if needed.

_________________
RobTheNerd.com | InstallerGen | SMBMounter | Atoms-X

@itix

Or use http://aminet.net/driver/video/P96Emu.lha .

Works on MOS.

@mailman2

That's not official and shouldn't be used since it is rather hackish IMO.
Picasso96 do clone/emulate CGFX since that was the RTG system that set the standard.

So it's better to do cgfx and use the official built-in cgfx "emulation" in P96 unless your doing something very specific toward P96.

using cgfx in AOS4.1 i bet is bit silly.
ps. cgfx have one good point (i talk my project related things if we talk whole things there both gets points)scalepixelarray...

@Vanhapolle

CGX also has WritePixelArrayAlpha(). There is no equivalent call in P96. And few more but well.

_________________
Amiga Developer
Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook

@itix

My current idea dont need such function.ps. i try do something before Xmas 2015.(i really mean it,and year is not typo,2014 is impossible becouse i wait AOS4.1 and one thing which tell when i buy MOS3.7)

ps. and i thinked today how i do most clear mainloop. and most correct way if i cannot open libraries. and other error handling. i dont coded anything becouse i AOS3.9 way is so different to compared new AOS4.1,and MOS3.7 way in some areas. i maybe still test datatypes library in AOS3.9 with simple code which tells if understanded few things correctly.if so i bet understanded few other things as well. if so i can get quickly working base for my first useful program. whih i code way where i can extend it easily.

Last edited by Vanhapolle on 15-Nov-2014 at 07:14 AM.

for CGX sdk is latest in AmigaOS3.5 Developer CD v2.1? if not where i get it. CGX seems give few functions which looks useful at least some projects maybe not my first.

Last edited by Vanhapolle on 15-Nov-2014 at 07:35 AM.

@Develin

I use Picasso96 for over 15 years.
Picasso96 works on more systems that I use : Amiga OS 4, UAE, Amiga 68k plus a mediator.
CGX I can only use under MOS.
That's why I prefer to use Picasso96.

@mailman2

Yes but P96 emulates CGX api. and i also prefer p96 becouse AmigaOS4.1 uses it. I bet All these nice routines even or i dont know if not then i want know it soon becouse later today i going print CGX docs.

@Vanhapolle/mailman

Quote:

Vanhapolle wrote: using cgfx in AOS4.1 i bet is bit silly.

Well, noone is talking bout useing CGX in OS4 !!!

Useing the CGX-API on the other hand makes perfect sense as it is supported everywhere from 68k (if GFX card is present and sometimes even when not) MorphOS, AROS, Amithlon, OS4 and UAE.
Sometimes it is the native API, in other cases it's just a thin layer translating those calls to functionilty identical "native" APIs.

So yes, code that stuf in CGX and only when you need something specific that is not optimaly covered by the CGX_V3 API (AFAIK that is whats provided by P96 and AROS) go for something else.

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

@Vanhapolle

You find the latest CGX SDK from the MorphOS SDK.

_________________
Amiga Developer
Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook

P96Emu works for me, so I'm going to continue to use the functions of Picasso96 even on MOS.

@mailman2

What software you develop?

_________________
Amiga Developer
Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook

@mailman2

Well, since I support all systems (including AROS) I won't use something that limits me to a certain RTG-software and since P96 does cover the most crucial CGFX API calls I prefer to use that for my software. AROS has it's own CGFX implementation but no P96 emulation what I'm aware of.


@Vanhapolle 

As the clown said, we not talking about switching the RTG system, we talk about the API-calls here =)

@Develin

As far I tested it, P96Emu work also on AROS 68k.

x86 AROS is not Amiga OS compatible, so I do not care about it.