Keep us updated about the progress!

ih8registrations wrote:

Direct X has MMX emulation.

That's more of a MMX-based Direct3D software rasterizer (like its MMX-less cousin "RGB Emulation" but not dirty like "Ramp emulation") than actual emulation of MMX instructions.

No, in InitDirect3D it checks for mmx and sets to mmx emulation if not found. The catch that I see is that it depends on it being enabled at compile time, where the example shows it's disabled.

The sarcasm is unnecessary wd.

I currently see no use to have MMX. Who knows about the future, but currently no.

Well, I read some more to refresh my memory:

I was wrong about SSE being unable to work on chars. I didn't check it in details, but the SSE2 instructions are advertised as a superset of the MMX ones.

Using SSE2 could be a good option for most cases, but, since the MMX registers and some flags have to be manually cleared before x87 instructions are executed, (http://www.tommesani.com/MMXEMMS.html#), I'm almost certain that, even though not clearing them was risky, some programmers abused the functionality...

There's no sarcasm, and while i don't see any reason for MMX emulation
i'm curious how far you'll get. Especially when using host-wise SSEx stuff.

Maybe we want "so far get", because we need such emulation? I hope, somebody will have a good mind to make MMX emulation in DOSBOX. I'm not a programmer, and I can't but I'm sure this can DOSBOX great improve.
wd, you are DOSBOX creator and I have really much respect for you. But If you haven't time (or will) to make this emulation a reality, why you are so trenchant? Nobody ask you to make this emulation, nobody here bother you, why?

well we would have to maintain it if we put it inside the code.
Possibly relying on more dependencies (those libraries mentioned) and probably dealing with more asm in the source tree.

currently the DOSBox team doesn't see need for MMX, how easy or how hard it is to code. Hence we wish everybody success on coding it. but the chances of adding it to dosbox are rather slim, unless it is a very easy and doesn't introduce any new depencies.

@ OSH: wd is always very terse in writing, and often sarcastic, but it's not the case this time around, apparently.

Did I say was going to code this? Are you pretending as if I had? No, and yes.

Excellent.
Thank you ih8
So I can now safely close this topic.
(as else I feared I might have blocked some attempt on coding it.)

ih8registrations wrote:

Did I say was going to code this? Are you pretending as if I had? No, and yes.

A narcissistic response, as it was Zorbid who talked about actually doing it.

Qbix, resume fear since you potentially stomped on Zorbid :p