Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 10:10:35 -0800 (PST) From: Mike Hoskins <mike@adept.org> To: advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Most wanted Message-ID: <20040305100536.N64460@snafu.adept.org> In-Reply-To: <20040305155015.Y38020@haldjas.folklore.ee> References: <Pine.LNX.4.43.0403011839470.3269-100000@pilchuck.reedmedia.net> <200403050615.55106.dgw@liwest.at> <20040305155015.Y38020@haldjas.folklore.ee>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 5 Mar 2004, Narvi wrote: > > I'm not speaking of your average code, I'm speaking of high-speed assembly > > language programs. > and how many millions of lines of that have you written and maintained? > Are you sure it would not be faster if it was re-written in C and compiled > ? i think we've wondered off the path, wherever that was to begin with. there are times and places for everything, including platform-specific asm. surely we don't have to get into an argument over something that obvious, or over something like "usefulness of portable code" -- for that please refer to CS101 at your closest univsersity. (actually, that's a bit hopeful. the art of writing portable code is often not taught at all, but painfully learned.) i just think you both have points, and are speaking past each other. 'how many millions of lines of that have you written...' is no more proof or disproof of related statements than how many millions of lines of asm you've ported to C, compiled, and performance tested. with or without that experience, most people with a little experience can point out pros and cons of both approaches. -m
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040305100536.N64460>