Re: assembler [was: Re: cheers for gogo]

[Alastair Donlon <nospam [at] netsoc.ucd.ie>]

On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 10:19:14AM +0000, Jim Jackson wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, 13 Mar 2000 will [at] south-of-heaven.demon.co.uk wrote:
> 
> > ... It is a good way of seeing
> > another perspective of your code. Makes you appreciate C++ when you have
> > it as well.
> 
> I wouldn't go that far. Never seen anything even vaguely make me
> appreciate C++ . It's bloatware spawn of the devil :-)

Fair comment, when it comes to C++. I hope you're not talking about general
object-oriented languages, though. There are plenty of them out there, and
they make the task of programming much faster. They fall down in terms of
performance and efficiency, but if you want to write good code which can
be used repeatedly and which allows you to build efficiently on what you've
already written, then you can't beat them. 

I wouldn't even contemplate trying to write a generic sort routine in
assembler. A fast one, maybe, but a truly reusable and extensible one,
no way.

A.D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheffield Linux User's Group - http://www.sheflug.co.uk
To unsubscribe from this list send mail to
- <sheflug-request [at] vuw.ac.nz> - with the word 
 "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. 

  GNU the choice of a complete generation.