Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
From:	Michael Lam <wy2lam AT undergrad DOT math DOT uwaterloo DOT ca>
Subject:	Re: allegro == or != programming
Sender:	news AT undergrad DOT math DOT uwaterloo DOT ca (news spool owner)
Message-ID:	<Pine.SOL.3.95q.980805133735.18920A-100000@picard.math.uwaterloo.ca>
In-Reply-To:	<35C8166C.9B3423CA@geocities.com>
Date:	Wed, 5 Aug 1998 17:53:09 GMT
References:	<35C42D12 DOT C9D01BA1 AT geocities DOT com> <35c967e0 DOT 17829184 AT news DOT Austria DOT EU DOT net> <35C8166C DOT 9B3423CA AT geocities DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	picard.math.uwaterloo.ca
Mime-Version:	1.0
Organization:	University of Waterloo
Lines:	25
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Having seen so many posts, I'm glad that this thread does not seem to be a
war =)

My opinion is, if your aim is to learn, try to hack as much as you can
learn.  Altho computer systems changes from hour to hour, the underlying
basic priniple has only slightly changed since 70s.  So, in the long run,
you earn no matter how the world changes.

However, if your concern at this moment is productivity, do not reinvent
anything - I dare say Allegro is enough for most DOS multimedia programs -
even if you do not know what's going on underneath.
The point is, let division of labour work for you while your software
expand more in scale than in complexity.

Allegro is just another layer of hardware abstraction - the gift we have
all been enjoying from DOS, DJGPP, and even Assembly language.  Perhaps 10
years later, what we have all been arguing now won't even be a
question.  The Java force shows that very clearly (VB? Heaven forbid!)
Maybe in a year we'll all be arguing about Allegro vs. CASE (where the
computer itself helps to program).

All in all, this is a progress of abstraction.  I personally see no
problem to it, as long as the underlying layers are reliable and robust,
and the hardware is fast enough.

- Raw text -