MaxCoderz

I would go with 2 500GB's in RAID 1, and another 2 500GB's in RAID 1. Now unless both drives die in one of the arrays, then your screwed, and have lost your data, but if only one fails then you are fine. If you don't want to keep a copy, then I would just get 2 500 GB's to make 1TB and put them in R...

no what i meant was that realism is limited by the vision of the artist and ya, I'm pretty happy too w/ some of the current graphics when the artists do a really good job and take advantage of the gpu power. That isn't totally true. Physics adds as much realism as art does. As Pixar once said, &quo...

Ah, yes I see what you mean by it being a hack.

CoBB: Aren't we all. We wouldn't be at this forum if we weren't.

Who wouldn't use polygons? Also Liazon the benefit of raytracing isn't lots and lots of polygons, it is in fact photorealistic pictures, although I think those have already been achieved(look at GT5 HD) Either way there are so many more advances to be done other than just graphics with the advent of...

CoBB: And what are you saying about programmers? For your information Insomniac Games stays in close contact with STI to stay on top of new technology, and what to do with technology now such as the CELL processor. Also did you read my post? Intel even gave their view on the topic, and they agreed! ...

CoBB: That may be so, but seriously the amount of time it would take for one ray to get finished in a 1,000,000 polygon level, like what are present today, would take immensely long to do reflection, refraction, deflection, and all the other stuff. Let alone the fact it would take 786,432(1024x768) ...

King_Harold: because human brains are far more complex and better at making arbitrary mental connections than a computer. It is comparable to the common wall of raytracing for realtime games. It just simply isn't going to happen in either one of our lifetimes. actually, good idea for a comparison, ...

That is a guaranteed yes. Mainly because my compiler eliminates stack frames, and also goes through many more intermediate steps than SDCC. For example 2 high-level passes are performed with 1 low-level pseudo assembly pass, and then a target-dependent pass. This makes for 4 optimization passes with...

Yes, floating point math is tedious. Uhh, but I have no idea what you just said. There is more of a process to C compilation, then I think you really realize. Why don't you try writing down a few examples of C yourself, and see how you would optimize them. Is the process to time consuming? Not at a...

Yes, floating point math is tedious. Uhh, but I have no idea what you just said. There is more of a process to C compilation, then I think you really realize. Why don't you try writing down a few examples of C yourself, and see how you would optimize them. Is the process to time consuming? Not at al...

Yes it has been around. Optimization isn't the best, but it is dealable.

@King_Harold: Don't gripe about it here, talk to the developer. It is easier for the compiler to maintain a stack frame though.

King Harold: SDCC is trying to be a "real" compiler and implement a stack frame with ix. That is how C compilers do it like GCC, and the others. That is why it is simply illogical to try and target a C compiler to z80.

If you want to develop on the PSP checkout:

ps2dev.org

Despite the name it holds information on PS2 development, PSP, and PS3 development.

crzyrbl: time.h, timing.h, ctime.h are all the same headers and yes clock_t is cross platform, but as stated in my topic post, I need a library to manipulate milliseconds which is not the case with clock_t since it only goes up to seconds.

jim_e: Thanks

benryves: Hmm alright. Well really all I need is a timing library that works on windows and x86 then I guess. The only thing I don't get is how come millisecond timing can't be cross platform, but second timing is.