Re: Computer time -> Developer time -> User time?
From: Betov (betov_at_free.fr)
Date: 01/21/05
- Next message: Phil Carmody: "Re: this is the time to pray"
- Previous message: alextangent: "Re: this is the time to pray"
- In reply to: Beth: "Re: Computer time -> Developer time -> User time?"
- Next in thread: The /\\\\o//\\annabee: "Re: Computer time -> Developer time -> User time?"
- Reply: The /\\\\o//\\annabee: "Re: Computer time -> Developer time -> User time?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 21 Jan 2005 12:54:28 GMT
"Beth" <BethStone21@hotmail.NOSPICEDHAM.com> écrivait
news:Z%1Id.153$RK1.62@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net:
> [...]
>
> Huh?!? Rene, you do realise that I'm promoting "open source",
> "anti-bloatware" practices, "specific philosophy" and so forth?
>
> I'm trying to prove _YOUR_ case and even you are attacking it?
>
> [...]
>
> I think I _DID_ point out in my original post that "this is _MY_
> interpretation of Rene's specific philosophy".
>
> [...]
:)) Pshittttt!!!... Pshittttt!!!... :))
>> My view of "Specific Programming" is neither something
>> very fixed, nor something clearly defined, but, for sure,
>> it is anything but that simple, as your own view seems
>> to be.
>
> Ah, okay...it's a "mystery", is it?
Up to now, there are only two short sentences of mines,
in B_U_Asm, where i introduce this concept, in RosAsm /
[OverView], as concerning a Tool devoted to output only
one type of executables (PEs), and as a Programming Style
not taking care of the usual Portability claims.
Evidently way too short for making this concept something
"clearly defined" :)) but too much for making it a "mystery".
:))
Indead, this concept would deserve a complete Chapter,
but, up to now, the fact is, that, this concept is _not_
"achieved", in my own mind. Of course, i know what i mean,
but this is not yet neither fixed enough, nor clear enough,
in my mind for providing a serious paper, and i am afraid
this is exactly the same for you (one of the reason why,
first, nobody understood the purpose of your initial post).
Maybe, one other day, either you or me will be able to do
this...
Another thing, that everybody failed to see in your post,
is about the "intention". If this is sweet dream, this
is OK to me: Let us all wish so. If this is a serious hope
that facts will win on propaganda and illusions selling,
i am afraid this will be way more painfull than providing
facts, real Tools, effective methods, and so on...
If it was only facts, good ideas, valid concepts, and the
like, the Assembly Rebirth would have been way faster done.
Today, nobody would any more use MASM, we would not hear
any more of Randall Hyde, most Programmers on earth would
be Asmers, and most Application would be as fast and easy
as RosAsm is. :)) :)) :))
Why do you think that an intelligent and honest guy, like
Herbert, goes on claiming that Asm is _not_ the language
for Applications programming, and that C is the Tool?
Do you believe that, after you will have explained to him
that "Developements time is no more a problem, because the
GPL makes it out of thread" he will be driven to the real
consideration that Asm devs are _effectively_ not longer
time than HLLs ones? If this was possible to convince him
that way, he would have changed his opinion since years.
Betov.
- Next message: Phil Carmody: "Re: this is the time to pray"
- Previous message: alextangent: "Re: this is the time to pray"
- In reply to: Beth: "Re: Computer time -> Developer time -> User time?"
- Next in thread: The /\\\\o//\\annabee: "Re: Computer time -> Developer time -> User time?"
- Reply: The /\\\\o//\\annabee: "Re: Computer time -> Developer time -> User time?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
