Reply-To:	<arfa AT clara DOT net>
From:	"Arthur" <arfa AT clara DOT net>
To:	"DJGPP Mailing List" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	RE: allegro == or != programming
Date:	Tue, 4 Aug 1998 14:22:20 +0100
Message-ID:	<000401bdbfaa$e893fc80$ec4b08c3@arthur>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Importance:	Normal
In-Reply-To:	<003901bdbf18$044f2d20$6aeebc8c@atchison2.prc.com>

> I think everyone has missed the point.  Merlin is suggesting that we throw
> away valuable progress, so that we may all learn by trial and fire (opps I
> mean error).  This is an absurd idea.  We(the programming community) would
> not have progressed this far if we subscribed to a philosophy such as this.
> None of use would have jobs, beacuse the computer would never have been
> invented.  Etc., Etc., Etc.

No, he was simply asking for an opinion. I agree with him to some extent. It is
important to know what goes on beneath the functions. This is NOT the same as
abandoning years of programming development. It's just that some people (myself
included) like to have 100% control over their code. If I use an Allegro function I
make it my business to ensure I know it inside out and back to front. For instance, I
am at the moment hacking into Allegro's BITMAP structure and writing an alternative
sprite routine that accesses data on a lower level than blit.

> I suggest to Merlin to try writting his next program in assembler, because C
> is to assembler, like Allegro is to C++.  This might give him the
> understanding that his questing for.

No, he should get a HEX editor and program in hexidecimal...

Allegro is not a different language to C++. You can only use that analogy if you also
say that libc is a different language to C++.

James Arthur
jaa AT arfa DOT clara DOT net
ICQ#15054819

- Raw text -