Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!gilgalad From: gilgalad@caen.engin.umich.edu (Ralph Seguin) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Poor software (was '030 Ami vs '040 NeXT) Message-ID: <1990Dec10.163711.19847@engin.umich.edu> Date: 10 Dec 90 16:37:11 GMT References: <9012040257.AA10743@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> <1990Dec5.233501.43949@cc.usu.edu> Sender: news@engin.umich.edu (CAEN Netnews) Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor Lines: 75 In article <1990Dec5.233501.43949@cc.usu.edu> sl195@cc.usu.edu (A banana is not a toy) writes: >Amen. Along with the faster CPUs, cheaper RAM, bigger HDs, I've seen a >trend to NOT optimize software. "Let the compiler do it." That's nice, but Certainly true. There is no excuse for not trying to write the best code possible. >the best optimizing compiler can't make up for human laziness. Well, this is debatable :) Compilers can do some amazing optimizations. I think that quite a few things should be left to the compiler, but writing good code isn't one of them :) >Sloppy software on a fast machine is as good as well-written software on a >slow one. Most certainly true. Who says that UNIX code is all that sloppy? >I'm not impressed with n*xt's multi-megabyte OS. That's worse than i*m's >OS/2!!! Come on, guys. I know that the market is tough, and you have to I have to disagree with this. We all know that OS/2 is a piece of junk. Have you EVER used BSD UNIX with NeXTStep tacked on top? >get stuff out before the "other guy" in order to stay afloat, but how about >some _quality_? I realize that there is a minimum size for any software, >but I find it hard to believe that the n*xt OS has come close to that. What? I don't understand. Are you trying to say that it takes up too much disk space for the NeXT OS? It's UNIX. UNIX almost by definition is a disk hog. >Having a multi-megabyte OS is one of the fastest ways to get me to not buy >a computer. I hope that C= hasn't taken short cuts with the 3000UX like it >appears that n*xt has. What shortcuts are these? If I were going to be getting a 3000UX or 4000UX, I would in no way want anything less than a 600 meg disk. Same goes for any UNIX box for me. >My best software on my *** A500 *** screams, and is compact. No FPU, no >MIPS. Just efficent ************ code. (If it screams on a A500 I'd >love to try it on a 3000 :-) Must agree, efficient code is the only way to fly. Efficient code is not just limited to the Amiga you know. >P.S. eunics (un*x :-) is not a plus in my book. I have to work with it, and >don't enjoy it. This is a religions matter :) Personally, I love UNIX. Amiga OS is VERY UNIX-like, minus multi-user stuff and vm. >> standard practice to optimize a program on such a platform, as the speed >> difference is most noticable at that level! Standard practice is to produce the best general algorithm with lowest complexity level. >-- > >All comments are my own, and many must be taken with a :-) >=============================++++++++++++++++++++============================= >| Demetrios Triandafilakos | James Knowles | "Remember, always remember,| >| Shire of Cote du Ciel | BITNET: SL195@USU | my son -- a banana is not | >| Principality of Artemesia | INTERNET: | a toy." | >| Kingdom of Atenvelt | sl195@cc.usu.edu | - The Wise Guru | >=============================++++++++++++++++++++============================= > Be all that you can be - see your local SCA Knight Marshal now. See ya, Ralph Ralph Seguin gilgalad@dip.eecs.umich.edu 536 South Forest Apt. #915 gilgalad@caen.engin.umich.edu Ann Arbor, MI 48104 (313) 662-4805