Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Nibiru is actually a BoingBall...  (Read 11328 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Nibiru is actually a BoingBall...
« on: July 28, 2012, 12:25:32 AM »
Quote from: Tripitaka;701380
http://www.os4coding.net/blog/59

Sarcasm is no alternative to knowledge.


Nor is blaming tools, documentation and other people for one's own inability to achieve something:

http://code.google.com/p/polymorph/source/detail?r=170
Quote
the inline assembly also needs to be made
useful as well instead of the possibly incorrect advice I have been given
and what is in the documentation actually being actively thrown out as
compiler errors... honestly.. What The F***!?!?!?


I hate to think the worst, but a review of the changesets in that repository reveal a lot of indecision about naming things, creation of empty functions and no real implementation work. Even the startup code just opens a few libraries then closes them again immediately. Yet most of the changes are annotated in a manner that makes them sound like lots of progress is being made. All of which stops just after the first hurdle, when it is discovered that gcc's asm() syntax is a bit tricky. Even then, a lot of the functions that he's using it for would be no less efficient in vanilla C; a function to write a byte to an address is not going to benefit from assembler optimisation (unless it is called from some other assembler routine where registers are mapped in a custom manner).
int p; // A
 

Offline Karlos

  • Sockologist
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 16879
  • Country: gb
  • Thanked: 5 times
    • Show all replies
Re: Nibiru is actually a BoingBall...
« Reply #1 on: July 29, 2012, 10:13:24 PM »
Quote from: haywirepc;701471
And I'm sorry, I didn't know I could be banned for having an opinion.


You can't. You can be for how you go about expressing it though. Try to bear that in mind, umkay?

To me, the issue isn't that he spent 5 minutes making a wallpaper "for fun" is not an issue. What is a problem, however, is that he didn't accredit the original artist when he posted this, even if it was just a line to give the URL the original image came from. That's simply not cricket.
int p; // A