On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 15:49:08 -0500 (EST) bwmott@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>I've had a few conversations with Aaron about the 1.0 port and he is
>making progress. It seems that the C++ compiler he uses has a few nasty
>memory management bugs in its C++ library. The 1.0 code uses a few
>more C++ features than the 0.7 code did and as a result these bugs
>surfaced.
>
>The last email I got from him indicated that he had found a way to hack
>around these compiler bugs and that he was making progress on the port.
>If he doesn't get overwhelmed at work writing games then we should see
>MacStella 1.0 before long.
Geez. Code bloat, defective compilers, bad libraries, terrible object code
(ever examine C++ call chains?, unbelievable stack usage, routines which just
shuffle params around and call another bajillion functions, etc)... can someone
explain to me why people bother using C++ at ALL? As a UNIX sysadmin who
compiles just about everything he uses on his core systems, of the 100 or more
pieces of software I've compiled and installed, the only programs that wasted my
time trying to get compiled and working correctly were C++ programs. (picky
about compiler versions, picky about libs, picky about the brand of my underwear
I was wearing).
Someone please tell me what I'm failing to understand. You can obtain awesome
code re-use and modular design with even assembly language, let alone C. So
what the bloody hell is served by this crap like C++? It's ironic that its
CLAIMED advantages are "increased productivity, reduced programmer working in
circles, 'better structural syntax'" etc and yet releasing new products written
with take longer to make, are piggier and bloated, and run very slowly.
*GASP*
I must be mentally retarded.
In frustration,
=Robert=
--
Archives (includes files) at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/archives/
Unsub & more at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/
