 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp escreveu:
> nemesis <nam### [at] nospam-gmail com> wrote:
>> Ah, nothing more fake than programming in assembly disguised in your fav
>> programming language... :P
>
> OTOH haskell, at least when using ghc, is nothing more than a wrapper
> around C, so when you write a haskell program you are *really* writing
> a C program, just with some fancy features.
>
> Nothing more fake than claiming a language is about as fast as C, when
> in fact it's *compiled as C*, in the first place.
It's not wrappers like PHP and other scripting language do, merely
calling predefined C wrappers for every high level constructs you have:
GHC and others actually generate and reduce those wrappers on-the-fly
from the compiled program. Many Scheme compilers also employ C as backend.
A compiler is merely a program that translates from language A to
language B and there's nothing wrong with using C as the B target. You
leverage from a good performant cross-platform compiler available
everywhere and can focus on how to best translate it to a single
language rather than having to deal with low-level machine specifics.
And you can program in a language with far more convenient and higher
level abstractions.
That said, as Andrew noted, GHC has had a native code generator for a
long while now.
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott escreveu:
>> Are speeds in the range of 2-5x slower than C/C++ acceptable?
>
> For most of the stuff I write, no.
For most software programmers not writing device drivers, more than yes. :)
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott escreveu:
> wonder how many people use Blender on both Linux and Windows regularly,
> compared to those that only use it on Windows?
Windows is far more used than Linux and thus it is expected that most
Blender users are also Windows users.
>> Why should it use DOS mechanisms when it predates DOS?
>
> Dunno, it's beyond me why they use some crappy text based folder
> navigator that takes 20 years to get to "My Documents", Windows has a
> standard open file dialog that is orders of magnitudes better (it
> includes shortcuts to common and recent folders, plus does the folder
> order the correct way ie starting with Desktop and not a list of
> drives), why on Earth don't they use that? It's like 2 lines of code to
> call it - just completely idiotic not to use it.
"2 lines" of platform-specific C code that will likely require in turn
another hundreds of lines of specific wrappers and type declarations
just to call those "2 lines". dired mode is only suffering for people
who do not take their time to learn how to properly use it.
> But if every app decided they were "platforms in themselves" you end up
> never remembering how to use any program.
I remember vim very well because I carry it along with me everywhere I
go. Better than going to a platform and having to use some crappy tool
than going to another and having to learn to use another crappy tool and
so on. That standard vi way of doing things is a blessing rather than
adapting to the current platform. I mean, I know to use it really well,
what if I came along, opened it and suddenly every shortcut is different
to please the Windows flavor? hell, no!
> Really what is the
> disadvantage with Ctrl-S being save instead of Ctrl-W in Blender, apart
> from the fact that "it's always been like that"?
The disadvantage is that it began that way and people learned it that
way and if they change now people will complain. Legacy software is
always like that.
> At least give the
> option to switch between Standard Windows interface and traditional
> Blender.
I don't think you understand: Blender's UI is all OpenGL. If you want
to contribute code to Windows-specific UI then go ahead, sources are
available.
>> Or the user can simply sigh, turn behind and continue using his lowly
>> tools.
>
> Umm, I take it you've never used any commercial 3D software designed for
> Windows? The first port of Pro/Engineer (commercial 3D CAD software) to
> Windows was just like Blender is today, everyone complained and hated it
> apart from a few die-hard supporters. Today Pro/E looks and acts like a
> proper Windows application, getting far more approval and take-up from
> the industry than the earlier versions that were widely criticised.
Never heard of it. Niche tools can indeed do better by going
platform-specific.
> I guess the difference is that the Blender developers have no incentive
> to sell more copies.
I realize now you didn't comment on my comparation with games and their
specific interfaces.
> If it was a commercial operation someone with
> half-a-brain would demand that a default option for standard Windows
> behaviour and dialogs be added, otherwise nobody is going to take it
> seriously apart from the die-hard supporters.
And lazy people who wish to use it if only it didn't take some learning.
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott escreveu:
>>> Anti-aliasing means blur. No AA means crisp. ;)
>>
>> OMG, you can *not* say things like that, in the POV-Ray forums of all
>> places! :-P
>>
>> As you [I hope] know, AA means adding _extra information_ to the
>> image. It is not merely a bluring step (which _removes_ information).
>
> Especially using something like MS ClearType, which actually uses the
> known RGB sub-pixel structure of LCDs to get extra resolution when
> rendering text.
Hey, do you guys know this emoticon? -> ;)
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible escreveu:
> Mueen Nawaz wrote:
>
>> OK. Who let the vi guy in the Emacs thread?
>
> LOL! Well, of course Vi is the other editor that people claim is
> all-powerful...
Like, yeah, I even posed a vim challenge somewhere at the bottom of this
thread and the guy seemingly backed away ashamed. ;)
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible escreveu:
> Warp wrote:
>> Btw, another difference between emacs and notepad (and a lot of other
>> Windows text editors):
>>
>> If I need to edit a file remotely through SSH, emacs will do the job
>> (regardless of which OS I'm using, because emacs will be running on the
>> remote computer), notepad won't.
>
> Yes, it does seem that just about every Linux install known includes
> Emacs by default. (Although not so many include SSH by default.)
>
> One of the things I always liked about YaST is that it works in console
> mode as well as on X Windows.
That's actually still only true for vi (not even vim). Ubuntu doesn't
come default with Emacs installed and I guess neither do other
user-geared distros.
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Yes, it does seem that just about every Linux install known includes
>> Emacs by default. (Although not so many include SSH by default.)
>>
>> One of the things I always liked about YaST is that it works in
>> console mode as well as on X Windows.
>
> That's actually still only true for vi (not even vim). Ubuntu doesn't
> come default with Emacs installed and I guess neither do other
> user-geared distros.
Well, I do remember on more than one occasion being stuck with a
console-only system, and being unable to find any editor other than
Emacs [which I can't work].
Maybe it would be worth learning the default controls for Emacs for that
reason alone...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 escreveu:
>> That's actually still only true for vi (not even vim). Ubuntu doesn't
>> come default with Emacs installed and I guess neither do other
>> user-geared distros.
>
> Well, I do remember on more than one occasion being stuck with a
> console-only system, and being unable to find any editor other than
> Emacs [which I can't work].
Probably work by some emacs follower who installed it and unistalled vi,
nano and company. ;)
I think Debian comes with it default.
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Ubuntu doesn't
> come default with Emacs installed and I guess neither do other
> user-geared distros.
If I remember correctly, OpenSUSE doesn't install emacs by default
either (unless you select it in the installation options).
Not that it matters, as it's trivial to install afterwards with a
couple of mouse clicks.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp escreveu:
> nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> Ubuntu doesn't
>> come default with Emacs installed and I guess neither do other
>> user-geared distros.
>
> If I remember correctly, OpenSUSE doesn't install emacs by default
> either (unless you select it in the installation options).
>
> Not that it matters, as it's trivial to install afterwards with a
> couple of mouse clicks.
Yes. Or from the command-line via ssh. I remember when I was an emacs
nut and asked my boss to install emacs on a client server before I could
do some job there... :P
A while after I realized there was a hell of a lot more in vi than
simple, dumb line-oriented commands geared at systems admins...
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
