On Sat, 21 Nov 2009, Ivica Ico Bukvic wrote:
/* I should have learned C++ */
Except that you would also arguably lose on efficiency, particularly when it comes to encapsulation that Pd is designed around...
What are you talking about? If it's arguable, could you please argue about it, so that I can learn something new? In that case, though, which compilers are you talking about, and which elements of the language are you talking about?
and that would go a long way towards improving legibility, e.g. all_present_objects.cords.visible.
What would that piece of code mean? how would you use it? how would it fit with a C<->Tcl/Tk architecture? can it be expressed as C code naturally enough?
So is 40 hours used for a task that should've taken a fraction of that...
«Should» ? If you have used those hours well, you have now 40 hours of experience with the Pd source code, and surely this reduces the time it takes you to find another bug in Pd, or another bug in any other C programme, or another bug in any other programme, even. Well, it would be nice if it took less time to write a programme, read a programme and debug a programme, but unless we really have a good list of time-savers that are demonstrably good, it's hard to claim how many hours it could have been, and even then, it heavily depends on one's experience and on one's reluctance.
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard, Montréal, Québec. téléphone: +1.514.383.3801