Also
http://ithare.com/chapter-vb-modular-architecture-client-side-programming-languages-for-games-including-resilience-to-reverse-engineering-and-portability/ scroll to the part about language choice.
On Friday, 17 November 2017 at 00:36:21 UTC, codephantom wrote:
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 11:52:45 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grostad wrote:
Uhm, no? What do you mean by 'primary focus of program design'
and in which context?
I the context that, this is specifically what Stroustrup says
in
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 11:52:45 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grostad wrote:
Uhm, no? What do you mean by 'primary focus of program design'
and in which context?
I the context that, this is specifically what Stroustrup says in
his book (The Design and Evolution of C++ 1994)
"Simula's class
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 22:27:58 UTC, sarn wrote:
In the 90s (and a bit into the 00s) there was a pretty extreme
"everything must be an object; OO is the solution to
everything" movement in the industry.
Yes, around 1991, the computer mags were all over C++ and the
bookshelves in
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 09:43:07 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
ESR got famous for his cathedral vs bazaar piece, which IMO was
basically just a not very insightful allegory over waterfall vs
evolutionary development models, but since many software
developers don't know the basics of
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 11:52:45 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grostad wrote:
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 11:24:09 UTC, codephantom
I would never say OO itself is a failure. But the idea that is
should be the 'primary focus of program design' .. I think
that is a failure...and I think that
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 18:02:10 UTC, Patrick Schluter
wrote:
The shear amount of inscrutable cruft and rules, plus the
moving target of continuously changing semantics an order or
two of magnitude bigger than C added to the fact that you still
need to know C's gotchas, makes it one
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 18:06:22 UTC, Patrick Schluter
wrote:
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 16:38:58 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grostad wrote:
changing. C no longer models the hardware in a reasonable
manner.
Because of the flawed interpretation of UB by the compiler
writers, not because of
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 16:38:58 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad
wrote:
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 11:55:17 UTC, codephantom wrote:
[...]
Well, in another thread he talked about the Tango split, so not
sure where he is coming from.
[...]
No, the starting point for C++ was that
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 09:43:07 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 06:32:55 UTC, lobo wrote:
"[snip]...Then came the day we discovered that a person we
incautiously gave commit privileges to had fucked up the
games’s AI core. It became apparent that I was
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 11:24:09 UTC, codephantom wrote:
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 06:35:30 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grostad wrote:
Yes, I agree that classes are a powerful modelling primitive,
but my point was that Stroustrup made classes the 'primary
focus of program design'. Yes,
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 06:35:30 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grostad wrote:
No, classes is a powerful modelling primitive. C++ got that
right. C++ is also fairly uniform because of it.
Yes, I agree that classes are a powerful modelling primitive, but
my point was that Stroustrup made classes
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 07:12:16 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grostad wrote:
But I guess what you are saying is that many people arent good
at modelling...
I just want to add to this that I believe most people are much
better at OO modelling than other modelling strategies (ER, SA,
NIAM etc).
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 06:51:58 UTC, rikki cattermole
wrote:
On 16/11/2017 6:35 AM, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote:
Thing is, it is a failure, the way most people use it.
You can say that about most things: exceptions, arrays, pointers,
memory, structs with public fields... But I guess
On 16/11/2017 6:35 AM, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote:
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 02:12:10 UTC, codephantom wrote:
Perhaps the mistake C++ made, was concluding that 'classes' were the
"proper primary focus of program design" (chp1. The Design and
Evolution of C++).
No, classes is a powerful
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 02:12:10 UTC, codephantom wrote:
Perhaps the mistake C++ made, was concluding that 'classes'
were the "proper primary focus of program design" (chp1. The
Design and Evolution of C++).
No, classes is a powerful modelling primitive. C++ got that
right. C++ is
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 02:12:10 UTC, codephantom wrote:
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 11:55:17 UTC, codephantom wrote:
[...]
Actually, I got that wrong.
Perhaps the mistake C++ made, was concluding that 'classes'
were the "proper primary focus of program design" (chp1. The
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 11:55:17 UTC, codephantom wrote:
The reason he can dismiss D, so easily, is because of his
starting premise that C is flawed. As soon as you begin with
that premise, you justify searching for C's replacement, which
makes it difficult to envsion something like D.
On Wednesday, 15 November 2017 at 10:40:50 UTC, codephantom wrote:
On Wednesday, 15 November 2017 at 09:26:49 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
I don't think Go is much affected by the corporate…
Umm
"We made the language to help make google more productive and
helpful internally" - Rob
On Wednesday, 15 November 2017 at 09:26:49 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
I don't think Go is much affected by the corporate…
Umm
"We made the language to help make google more productive and
helpful internally" - Rob Pike
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sln-gJaURzk
2min:55sec
To be
On Wednesday, 15 November 2017 at 09:00:38 UTC, Joakim wrote:
problems; I want something that helps with apps that are big,
distributed, concurrent, and efficient because those are the
more important problems people are solving today and in the
future."
On Wednesday, 15 November 2017 at 02:05:27 UTC, codephantom wrote:
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 16:38:58 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grostad wrote:
It [C]is flawed... ESR got that right, not sure how anyone can
disagree.
Well I 'can' disagree ;-)
Right… :-)
Languages are just part of an
On Wednesday, 15 November 2017 at 02:05:27 UTC, codephantom wrote:
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 16:38:58 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grostad wrote:
It [C]is flawed... ESR got that right, not sure how anyone can
disagree.
Well I 'can' disagree ;-)
Is a scalpel flawed because someone tried to use it
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 19:48:07 UTC, Joakim wrote:
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 04:31:43 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
He mentions D, a bit dismissively.
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=7724=1#comment-1912717
Eh, he parrots decade-old anti-D talking points about
non-technical,
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 04:31:43 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
He mentions D, a bit dismissively.
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=7724=1#comment-1912717
Couldn't read that without cringing.
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 04:31:43 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
He mentions D, a bit dismissively.
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=7724=1#comment-1912717
I think that the date he mentions in that paragraph (2001) speaks
a lot for his argument, i.e. completely outdated.
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 16:38:58 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad
wrote:
It [C]is flawed... ESR got that right, not sure how anyone can
disagree.
Well I 'can' disagree ;-)
Is a scalpel flawed because someone tried to use it to screw in a
screw?
Languages are just part of an evolutionary
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 04:31:43 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
He mentions D, a bit dismissively.
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=7724=1#comment-1912717
Eh, he parrots decade-old anti-D talking points about
non-technical, organizational issues and doesn't say anything
about the language
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 06:32:55 UTC, lobo wrote:
And I fixed it all right – took me two weeks of struggle. After
which I swore a mighty oath never to go near C++ again.
...[snip]"
Reminds me of the last time I touched C++. A friend wanted help
with the Unreal Engine. While
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 11:55:17 UTC, codephantom wrote:
The reason he can dismiss D, so easily, is because of his
starting premise that C is flawed. As soon as you begin with
that premise, you justify searching for C's replacement, which
makes it difficult to envsion something like D.
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 04:31:43 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
He mentions D, a bit dismissively.
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=7724=1#comment-1912717
The reason he can dismiss D, so easily, is because of his
starting premise that C is flawed. As soon as you begin with that
premise, you
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 06:32:55 UTC, lobo wrote:
"[snip]...Then came the day we discovered that a person we
incautiously gave commit privileges to had fucked up the
games’s AI core. It became apparent that I was the only dev on
the team not too frightened of that code to go in. And I
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 04:31:43 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
He mentions D, a bit dismissively.
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=7724=1#comment-1912717
"[snip]...Then came the day we discovered that a person we
incautiously gave commit privileges to had fucked up the games’s
AI core. It
33 matches
Mail list logo
