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