Yokemate of Keyboards
Posts: 11967 from 2003/5/22
> It is entirely possibly that parts of LightWave3D for MacOS/PPC ARE written in
> PPC Assembler Language, as it is a program that needs lots of CPU performance
> to work well and writing parts of it in Assembler Language would probably increase
> it's speed
True. If that's the case, then a MacOS/PPC version would be better portable to MorphOS than any x86 version with those same parts written in x86 ASM instead. That said, I assume those parts represent only a tiny fraction (if any) of the entire source code, so the real world difference in difficulty of porting the MacOS/PPC version versus porting any x86 version, with quantitatively the by far biggest part of the source code of either version in high level language (for easier maintainability and better compatibility between the versions for different CPUs), shouldn't be that big.
> It should be understood that a "PPC emulator of MacOSX" equals an emulator of
> MacOSX that runs on PPC.
Okay, I see now that you meant a [PPC [emulator of MacOSX]] rather than a [[PPC emulator] [of MacOSX]]. Sorry for misreading that. The reason I didn't get your meaning is that I know very well what a "PPC emulator" (= emulator of PPC) is, but wouldn't even know what an "emulator of MacOSX" is because as far as I understood your idea the genuine MacOSX from Apple is supposed to be running there instead of something that pretends to be (= emulates) MacOSX.
> I could have written it more clearly if I just wrote SheepShaver for MorphOS3.1
Yes, this would have been more clear to me as SheepShaver is not an "emulator of MacOS" in my book but a virtualization software that creates a virtual Mac hardware (sans CPU emulation) on Linux/PPC or MacOSX/PPC. Such virtualization software can usually even be used to run other operating systems like Linux (don't know if SheepShaver can, though).
> but I did not think my meaning would be misunderstood.
Sorry again that I did.
> it would probably be easier to complete a port of SheepShaver to run on
> MorphOS3.1, than it would be to complete a port of LightWave3D PPC
> to MorphOS3.1
Normally I'd agree, but there seems to be a problem with virtualizations that would transparently use the CPU on MorphOS:
There's also iFusion
for OS3/WarpOS but unfortunately that doesn't work on MorphOS either:
> I am surprised you did not figure out my meaning
I hope to have made the cause for my misunderstanding and my reasoning transparent to you.