Shaklee3, I'm not Peter, but I can answer that question.
Non-diastatic malt is basically just sugar (maltose), while diastatic malt is sugar + enzymes. The enzymes break down the damaged starch in the flour into simpler sugars for the yeast to consume. The enzymes also, if given enough time, break down the gluten in the flour as well.
All grain seeds have a self destructive/catabolic process whereby they convert their constituent components (starch/protein) to sugar as food for the growing seedling. Enzymes are the demolition crew that slowly slice the larger molecules into smaller more digestible ones. Breadmaking capitalizes on this natural self digestion by swapping out the growing seedling (the germ) with growing yeast. Enzymes aren't generated in large quantities in grain seeds until sprouting occurs, but once sprouting does begin it tends to be irreversible, so they harvest pre-sprouting enzyme poor wheat and combine it with enzyme rich malted (sprouted and dried) diastatic barley. It's basically a way of taking a fairly unpredictable natural process and splitting it up into separate components so that it can be tightly controlled.
Diastatic malt adds enzymes, so, by adding diastatic malt, you're breaking down the flour faster. Most flours have diastatic malt added already, so more generally isn't necessary. It can be used to take non malted flours (such as Caputo) and make them more enzymatically active. Too much diastatic malt and you can end up with a gummy crust. Both diastatic and non diastatic malt contain sugar and sugar promotes browning, although the diastatic version because of the enzymes, is going to promote browning, as well as, if fermented long enough, weaker doughs.
I'm not sure that this is relative to this discussion, but there's a chance that diastatic malt might be the key in ramping the enzyme activity for a better emergency dough.