Xref: utzoo rec.games.hack:4870 comp.sys.mac.programmer:8392 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!fxgrp!news From: wiedmann@plover.fx.com (Christian Wiedmann) Newsgroups: rec.games.hack,comp.sys.mac.programmer Subject: Re: Any word on NetHack 3.0 for Mac? Keywords: Macintosh Message-ID: <1989Aug18.210038.5272@fxgrp.fx.com> Date: 18 Aug 89 21:00:38 GMT References: <30453@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <29657@mirror.UUCP> <19288@vax5.CIT.CORNELL.EDU> <9225@cadnetix.COM> <17422@bellcore.bellcore.com> Sender: news@fxgrp.fx.com (News) Organization: FXDevelopment, Mountain View, CA Lines: 27 sdh@wind.bellcore.com (Stephen D Hawley) writes: >In article <9225@cadnetix.COM> pem@cadnetix.COM (Paul Meyer) writes: >> [stuff about porting NetHack 3.0] >Good luck, I hope you do well. me too >I would like to offer a few suggestions (I too have considered doing the port): >slow. My main gripe with NetHack on the Mac is the speed of output. There >is no reason why a 9600 baud terminal should output faster than the screen. I've written some output routines on the Mac (unfortunately they probably wouldn't be useful for this purpose), and I can tell you that it's hard to get any reasonable performance out of the Mac. I'd be impressed by a terminal emulator which could run at 9600 baud throughput. If you really want fast, I think you'll have to do some serious optimization. >Steve Hawley >sdh@flash.bellcore.com -Christian The opinions stated in this message are not to be construed as representing those of my employer. Christian Wiedmann ...!ames!fxgrp!wiedmann