Re: Update on emulating a paddle on the C64.

From: Christopher Phillips (
Date: 2004-12-11 19:38:40

On 12 Dec 2004, at 01:50, Craig T. Taylor wrote:

> Actually, tmp=(new-old)/2 is better. (Really, tmp=(new-old)>>1 if the 
> compiler has a crappy optimizer). It's best to loose precision at the 
> end of an expression rather than midstream. The revised formula will 
> feel more responsive to relative changes while the new/2 - old/2 would 
> be okay for boundary changes.

tmp=(new-old)/2 has exactly the same bug that I was trying to avoid by 
doing the division - by the time you've divided by two you've already 

(btw, I should really have written tmp=(signed)(new/2)-(signed)(old/2), 
or (to take your parenthetical advice),



       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list

Archive generated by hypermail pre-2.1.8.