Date: Sun, 01 Sep 1996 14:02:45 -0400 From: "Kevin P. Neal" <kpneal@pobox.com> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams), richmond@cronus.oanet.com, sos@freebsd.org, durham@phaeton.artisoft.com, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Specs on a Hitachi CM2085me monitor anybody ?? Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19960901180245.006975f8@mindspring.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 02:34 PM 8/31/96 -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: >> I doubt you can 'blame' the coders. 99% of the video cards sold have >> been for platforms running M$ OS's, so therefore why spend the time >> necessary to have a 'generic' solution when one isn't necessary. > >Professionalism? What's that? ;) I'm going to a University that teaches "void main(void)" in it's 100-level CSC (CS is crop-science here, YES I am in the south!) programming class. Since 114 is the alternative to Chemistry II for many people, 95% of the people in CSC 114 will never take another programming class again. This makes it "OK" to teach void main here (or so I am told, I think that's bull). Worse: There are a BUNCH of "A" students here at NCSU in CSC. They make A's in all or most of their classes. Yet if you question them, they don't know their head from a hole in the ground. One example is klsmith2. She was working on homework for a programming class. It was a C++ class (they *love* C++ here. They don't teach C, but they do teach C++, Perl, and Java. Go figure. I learned C in 9th grade+, learned C++ in CSC 210, and when I picked up both the Perl books and the Java books, read for a moment, and code started flowing out of my hands. This is why you teach C and C++ instead of Perl or Java). She couldn't get her program to compile on the dialup machine she was logged into. She logged into a different one, it compiled, and she was happy. When questioned on _why_ it wouldn't compile on the first dialup, her response was: "I don't know, I don't DO hardware". The two dialups were Suns. One was running SunOS 4.x, the other 5.x. They had different versions of g++, and g++ tends to track the C++ spec. She didn't care, she just wanted her A. This is typical around here. Here is another: The m68k assembler class uses software (assembers, testing software) that was written by students here. One dude, last name Mott, now maintains the code. When I took the class and used the software, I noticed that the assembler was defined "void main(int argc, char **argv)". Aaaaaaarrrg, watch make spew ugly error messages that say things like "Fatal Error [randomnumberhere]". He released the new release of the suite, and I flamed him. He still hadn't corrected the void main problem. Worse, he had RCS id strings in the code that were all set to version 1.1 (and were not put into static strings). When asked about this, he said: 1) He didn't write the assembler, so he isn't going to correct it's bugs. 2) There where so many changes in the files it was pointless to continue using the same repository, so he started the history files over again. 3) He said there is no reason to ever put RCS id strings in static char arrays. He says that this is only done by people who have no idea what they are doing. Mott is a grad student in CSC. You want professionals? Heh. Don't move down to this area then, our "best" students suck by and large. I really need to graduate and get the heck out of here. >> Obviously the non-M$ OS's have gotten by with the minimal coding >> required, so any more time spent doing extra is wasted effort. >> >> As you are well aware, getting a product to market quickly is critical >> in the world of video cards, so the less time spent coding a driver the >> quicker you can make your bucks before the next generation of chipsets >> makes the card obsolete. > >Abstract the data from the code in the BIOS, and you increase code >reusability, reducing time to market. Time to market is a bogus >excuse to use for making an unprofessional design decision. We live in the era of "good enough" software. It doesn't have to be great, and bug-free, it just has to be enough for most people. Sucks, huh? Besides, increasing code reusability doesn't help much in *this* project, it's the *next* project that it helps in. Who thinks long term? (sarcasm) > > Terry Lambert > terry@lambert.org >--- >Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present >or previous employers. My past and present employeers would never be as rude as me. -- XCOMM Kevin P. Neal, Sophomore, Comp. Sci. \ kpneal@pobox.com XCOMM "Corrected!" -- Old Amiga tips file \ kpneal@eos.ncsu.edu XCOMM Visit the House of Retrocomputing: / Perm. Email: XCOMM http://www.pobox.com/~kpn/ / kevinneal@bix.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1.5.4.32.19960901180245.006975f8>