From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 12 02:06:28 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78AAD16A4DD for ; Wed, 12 Jul 2006 02:06:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from raistlin@tacorp.net) Received: from mail.tacorp.net (mail.tacorp.net [64.254.140.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97ADB43D46 for ; Wed, 12 Jul 2006 02:06:18 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from raistlin@tacorp.net) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.tacorp.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E8D31B5032; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 22:06:17 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at tacorp.net Received: from mail.tacorp.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.tacorp.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MxRMJTxD5Na1; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 22:06:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.tacorp.net (Postfix, from userid 1002) id D884E1B5027; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 22:06:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.tacorp.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D530A1B5008; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 22:06:15 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 22:06:15 -0400 (EDT) From: Jason Slagle To: mag@intron.ac In-Reply-To: <1152644432.30488@origin.intron.ac> Message-ID: <20060711220348.X4444@mail.tacorp.net> References: <1152540567.99616@origin.intron.ac> <44B2AE69.4080703@elischer.org> <44B2D2DF.2000401@sh.cvut.cz> <20060711.101403.-928138940.imp@bsdimp.com> <1152644432.30488@origin.intron.ac> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/99979: Get Ready for Kernel Module in C++ X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 02:06:28 -0000 On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, mag@intron.ac wrote: > I would repeat several sentences in my last reply. > Why would people write Windows application with rather MFC/ATL/.NET Framework > than direct Windows API? Why is gtkmm framework created for GTK+? Would you > write a X11 application with original X11 API, without QT or other X11 > toolkit? > I believe the answer is that all programmers are human begins, not > machines. Human programmer would reduce brainwork, even if an API > package/wrapper slightly reduces running efficiency. And this is why office 2003 takes longer to load on a 2.4ghz machine then office 97 did on a 233. I don't think that is a comparison you can safely make and retain any creditability. If you want to keep the changes you made in a local tree or a p4 tree or whatever, and show us we're all wrong when you're done, thats fine. But expecting committers to drop your code into the tree for such a purpose is silly. Jason -- Jason Slagle /"\ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign . X - NO HTML/RTF in e-mail . / \ - NO Word docs in e-mail .