Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 22:06:15 -0400 (EDT) From: Jason Slagle <raistlin@tacorp.net> To: mag@intron.ac Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/99979: Get Ready for Kernel Module in C++ Message-ID: <20060711220348.X4444@mail.tacorp.net> In-Reply-To: <1152644432.30488@origin.intron.ac> 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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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 .
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060711220348.X4444>