Re: Circlemud design issues

From: George (greerga@CIRCLEMUD.ORG)
Date: 04/26/98

On Sun, 26 Apr 1998, James Turner wrote:

>> Bad memory, I'd tell you but the archive doesn't search at
>> the moment.  So send your $40 to mudservices or mud.gator and get yourself
>> a K6 or Pentium II.  I'll keep running it on my 486/50 laptop also.
>Again, you misread their site.

I never said the Pentium II was dedicated.

The End:

I have come to the conclusion that you, my dear sir, are petty to a fault
and reiterate the same arguments over and over. I am all in favor of making
changes with people who will admit when they are wrong, but you shall
never, I see.

And if you believe I have never admitted I am wrong, I have said that:
1) macros have their limits, you just have to know them.  As in, there are
        some cases of macros that could be functions (CAN_SEE for example)
2) not everyone has as good a system as I, though some have better, and I
        do still have my 486/50 after all.
3) That speed is not everything, sometimes features outweigh their
4) That speed matters when it doesn't complicate the code unnecessarily.

* So in the case of threads, their use would outweigh the speed penalty.
(Of course, assuming we properly implement them so they have their full

* ASCII pfiles far outweigh any (trivial) performance penalty.

* Converting all macros to functions _does_not_ outweigh the performance
penalty because they have scarce advantages over macros.

Now then, I shall cease this useless chatter until you have some new facts
to support your argument or bring up another worthy topic.

I hope everyone else will wait for new developments also.

George Greer  -   | Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity | is not thus handicapped. -- Elbert Hubbard

     | Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ:  |
     | |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST