Reply-To:	<arfa AT clara DOT net>
From:	"Arthur" <arfa AT clara DOT net>
To:	"DJGPP Mailing List" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	RE: allegro == or != programming
Date:	Sat, 8 Aug 1998 14:09:16 +0100
Message-ID:	<000301bdc2cd$bed423e0$4f4d08c3@arthur>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Importance:	Normal
In-Reply-To:	<35d24b3d.1719757@news.Austria.EU.net>

> >For too long have these poor people have taken for granted the use of Wintel and
> >APIs. If we had a good processor to program on, we wouldn't need APIs
> (heard of many
> >APIs on the ST/Amiga/Mac?). Put it this way: on the ST about half the
> applications on
> >the market were 100% ASM. This included Papyrus, a document processor
> which had more
>
> Well, in these good old days (did I hear somebody snigger there?) ASM was the
> only language you could really use. I wouldn't go for ASM today because to me
> it is more important to get applications running across platforms. I really
> hate it when I wrote an utillity I like and then I go to Linux, DOS or Windows
> and I don't have.

I love ASM because of the speed it give you and the control. This is vital for speed
junkies like me :^)

> >features than Word'98 could shake a stick at. You couldn't do that on a Wintel
> >machine (did I hear someone calling VB5?).
>
> Isn't Word a VB frontend? :)
>
> Where do you want to crawl today? :)

Exactly. I have a trouble running it at a decent speed on my P200MMX with 64MB of
RAM. If it was written in C++ or ASM, the minimum spec for Word would drop down to
the low end of the market instead of the high end. You would have thought that with
BG's income he could at least afford "The Dummies Guide to Visual C++" for his
programmers...

James Arthur
jaa AT arfa DOT clara DOT net
ICQ#15054819

- Raw text -