Re: Writing bulletproof code
From: Malcolm (malcolm_at_55bank.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: 01/05/04
- Next message: Edward G. Nilges: "Re: Academic research aimed at improving programmer productivity?"
- Previous message: Malcolm: "Re: function pointers"
- In reply to: Richard Heathfield: "Re: Writing bulletproof code"
- Next in thread: Richard Heathfield: "Re: Writing bulletproof code"
- Reply: Richard Heathfield: "Re: Writing bulletproof code"
- Reply: Gerry Quinn: "Re: Writing bulletproof code"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 21:28:42 -0000
"Richard Heathfield" <dontmail@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote in
> On the contrary, I consider correctness to be more important than
> efficiency. If you think that I don't, then you have misunderstood me.
>
And you call yourself a games programmer?
Sometimes correctness is paramount. Normally we make some compromises (such
as storing real variables in 8 bytes) in the interests of efficiency. In
games we accept almost any quick and dirty result in the interests of
efficiency. After all, at the end of the day we're only setting pixels on
the screen. Who cares if that Laura is a pixel out?
- Next message: Edward G. Nilges: "Re: Academic research aimed at improving programmer productivity?"
- Previous message: Malcolm: "Re: function pointers"
- In reply to: Richard Heathfield: "Re: Writing bulletproof code"
- Next in thread: Richard Heathfield: "Re: Writing bulletproof code"
- Reply: Richard Heathfield: "Re: Writing bulletproof code"
- Reply: Gerry Quinn: "Re: Writing bulletproof code"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|