Date   : Fri, 18 Jun 2004 14:30:00 +0000
From   : Jules Richardson <julesrichardsonuk@...>
Subject: Re: Fragmented Emulators was RE: BeebEm under Linux?

On Fri, 2004-06-18 at 13:37, peter.3.edwards@... wrote:
> Which leads me to ask some questions I've been thinking about for some 
> time.  I hope this isn't considered flame-bait but I'd like to hear 
> other people's thoughts on the matter.
> 
> Why are there *so* many different BBC emulators which all work to 
> varying degrees?

Presumably because people generally like to 'own' a project, because
emulating a machine is a challenge, and because if you get something
that semi-works it's a natural reaction to release it into the community
and say "hey, look at what I've done". 

Nothing wrong with that either. Anyone writing an emulator has reason to
be proud of their effort in my book.

I recall the Spectrum having quite a few emulators last time I checked
(a few years ago now), and I can imagine other popular platforms being
the same (Apple ][ springs to mind, and the C64)

The shame is that looking around it seems that BeebEm is considered one
of the greats - personally I find it a pity (particularly as I could use
an emulator for serious projects right now!) that nobody's kept up with
support for non-PC platforms though. 

The fact that BeebEm regards itself as cross-platform implies that the
code was designed from the ground up to be portable to different
environments too, with only (I assume) changes in I/O devices for
display, sound, keyboard etc.

> Would it not make sense, then, to combine the efforts of these 
> into one, definitive, emulator?

Maybe there's too many options in terms of hardware spec to consider it
though? What minimum hardware spec works for one person doesn't work for
another. 

I expect ego does play a part though. People *generally* don't want to
be a little part of somebody else's project, they want to own it
themselves or not bother at all. That's just human nature.

Yes, I agree, an emulator with a well-defined core, and extensibility
and portability as a foundation of the design would seem like a good
idea (I can't comment on how good Mess is, or how much overhead the MAME
environment imposes). There are probably Windows-only emulators out
there that already go a long way toward the extensibility side of
things, but how tied to the Windows platform they are I don't know.

Unfortunately I don't know what I could contribute - my C++ is virtually
non-existant, and my C (and assembler, which is less relevant here
anyway) skills are slightly on the rusty side. I've spent a good few
years doing server-side Java work, so could possibly help with a lot of
the concepts behind the design - but presumably integration with MAME
dictates how all of that must work anyway. 

Problem is, all we might end up achieving is increasing the number of
BBC emulators to 26 :-)

cheers

Jules