CompuServe Messages

cheath, Since one could SetFunc the library anyway, why the worry? If someone wanted to be nasty, they could still supply their own library. My beef is that for any particular application, there are always faster and smaller ways of doing something than what is in a general purpose library. Just look at FastFonts! 8) ] If I knew what was in a library routine, when I do a SetFunc(), I could then be CERTAIN that I am not doing something 'wrong'. But using SetFunc's is (among many other shortcomings) wasteful of memory (and speed), whereas re-writing the library is more efficient (and not using the library is faster, although less space efficient for multiple tasks). My interest happens to be i'facing to the outside world, and in many cases (as I'm sure you know), it's not a matter of "Let's make it as fast as we can", but "if it's not fast enuf, it won't work". As it happens, there are some things the Amiga can't do and the Apple II can (primarily due to the text display on the Apple II), even considering the 're-writing' of a library by fast Fonts. BTW, I never have figured out why FastFonts (and FF-clones) screws up the display on this one program I have with 4 bitplanes, but I went to 3 planes for other reasons anyway. Perhaps if I knew exactly what Text() does, I could figure it out. (but then, maybe not). —Mike