0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
:[FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF→Pic8:[FEFEFEFEFEFEFE00→Pic7:[FCFCFCFCFCFC0000→Pic6:[F8F8F8F8F8000000→Pic5:[F0F0F0F000000000→Pic4:[E0E0E00000000000→Pic3:StoreGDB :StorePic :For(A,0,94:For(B,0,62:If pxl-Test(A,B:Pxl-On(A+1,B:Pxl-On(A,B+1:Pxl-On(A+1,B+1:Else:Pxl-Off(A+1,B:Pxl-Off(A,B+1:Pxl-Off(A+1,B+1:End:B+1→B:End:A+1→A:End:DispGraph:For(C,3,8:RecallPic :For(A,0,93:For(B,0,61:If pxl-Test(A,B:Pt-On(A,B,C*8+Pic0:Else:Pt-On(A,B,C*8+Pic0:Pt-Change(A,B,C*8+Pic0:End:B+C-1→B:End:A+C-1→A:End:DispGraph:EndGenerated by SourceCoder, © 2005 Cemetech
:[FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF→Pic8:[FEFEFEFEFEFEFE00→Pic7:[FCFCFCFCFCFC0000→Pic6:[F8F8F8F8F8000000→Pic5:[F0F0F0F000000000→Pic4:[E0E0E00000000000→Pic3:StoreGDB :StorePic :For(A,0,94:For(B,0,62:If pxl-Test(A,B:Pxl-On(A+1,B:Pxl-On(A,B+1:Pxl-On(A+1,B+1:Else:Pxl-Off(A+1,B:Pxl-Off(A,B+1:Pxl-Off(A+1,B+1:End:B+1→B:End:A+1→A:End:DispGraph:For(C,0,5:RecallPic :For(A,0,93:For(B,0,61:If pxl-Test(A,B:Pt-On(A,B,C*8+Pic3:Else:Pt-On(A,B,C*8+Pic3:Pt-Change(A,B,C*8+Pic3:End:B+C+2→B:End:A+C+2→A:End:DispGraph:EndGenerated by SourceCoder, © 2005 Cemetech
:[FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF]→Str8Z:[FEFEFEFEFEFEFE00]:[FCFCFCFCFCFC0000]:[F8F8F8F8F8000000]:[F0F0F0F000000000]:[E0E0E00000000000]
aaah ok I see. It might be hard for me to understand all of these, but I am starting to get it now. Thanks a lot for your help.Btw my program now works. I am not sure if it's faster or slower. If it's slower, the slow down is sure hard to notice, though. However, 811 bytes is much better than the 1546 bytes my other compiled program took. Still a bit large compared to the source (653 bytes for old program and 313 for new one) but a big improvement.
Nice to know.However, do you imply that two divisions in a row by 2 instead of a single one will be smaller or am I interpreting this exception wrong?