Re: c/c++: a new adventure

["Tim Elder" <TIM@tekotago.ac.nz>]

Bwahahahahahahaha

But seriously, I'd have to agree with the "you should be aware of the advantages/disadvantages each system has" statement. I prefer a C++/DirectX combination. But that's my personal preference and I'm just having a little fun and learning the whole process as I go, not having to optmize etc. Learn what suits you but don't stop there when you're done.

BTW, are there any hardware manufacturers that support DirectW???  ;^)

Peace.

Tim
Open Access Suite Supervisor

Phone: 8396 (internal) 479-3757 (direct)
Email: tim@tekotago.ac.nz


>>> EnderWiggenRules@aol.com 29/08/00 14:59:29 >>>
In a message dated 8/28/00 5:11:46 PM Central Daylight Time, 
TIM@tekotago.ac.nz writes:

<< There's also nothing _useful_ you can do in C++ that you can't do in =
 straight assembler either, or even better, HEX code... Anything you do in =
 any language is ultimately translated into machine code.
 
 The thing is that time is often a factor in modern development and OOP =
 makes larger programs more manageable without having to code from the =
 ground up and re-invent the wheel. >>

I actually LIKE re-inventing the wheel - except when the %^&* routine won't 
assemble. In fact, about half of my C++ programs rely on optimized assembly 
routines I have made in the last few years (I never use printf, I use 
_myprintf, which only implements the options of printf I use and uses a 
unique memory reference/linked list implementation that I find much easier to 
use than printf. I also never use cout/cin, but that's for no reason at all - 
I'm just used to _myprintf, which is 86% faster than printf).

As for my opinion of C and C++, I would say you should learn C++, but learn 
the differences between C and C++ so you can program both. Besides, you 
should be aware of the advantages/disadvantages each system has. In my 
profession, I'm basically given a piece of code and told to make it 150% 
faster (that's only funny until you realize the one with the paychecks is 
serious) and the language the code is in relies more on the initial 
programmer than the company standard. So you may need to be able to program 
or at least read C or C++ at will. 

Did I mention I made my own version of Direct X called Direct W that's 42% 
faster with hardware acceleration and 83-95% faster with software rendering? 
It's my job to do these things (in a committee of course - could you imagine 
trying to rebuild the entire Direct X package except faster by yourself?). Of 
course, our code looks NOTHING like Direct X, and almost everthing is 
programmed using different methods - - we just called it Direct W 
unofficially for fun.

Food for thought - ignore me at will
-Ender Wiggin
=================================================================
The GameProgrammer.Com mailing list is for the open discussion
of any topic related to the art, science, and business of
programming games. This list is especially tolerant of beginners.
We were all beginners once

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE please visit:
http://gameprogrammer.com/mailinglist.html 


ÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÝÑe GameProgrammer.Com mailing list is for the open discussion
of any topic related to the art, science, and business of
programming games. This list is especially tolerant of beginners.
We were all beginners once

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE please visit:
http://gameprogrammer.com/mailinglist.html