[openbeos] Re: How not to actively prevent a PPC version of your software and write better code at the same time
- From: "Nathan Whitehorn" <nathan.whitehorn@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 21:28:43 EDT (-0400)
> If they are, wonderful. If not, then, depending on the amount of work
> to be
> done, it may or may not make sense. Putting in prototypes for
> functions is
> good coding practice. Non-standard coding extensions to work around a
> compiler that we don't intend to keep is not
That's just it: they *are* standard coding extensions. GCC even takes
them if you turn off export all (which, IMHO, would be a good thing to
do)
> >Should we miss the possibility to have both x86 and PPC BeOS parts
> >replacements simply for a matter of 7 letters?
>
> Oh, come on. This is just getting silly.
Not really. Not exporting symbols *will* preclude the possibility of
any PPC parts until everything is running on NewOS.
> >But, hey, like all humans currently coding on Earth, I make my own
> >coding choices
> >and my own coding mistakes (using C++ comments in a C file
> >-private joke for David Reid, kinda ;-) )
>
> As do we all. :-) I know it sounds like I am on an anti-PPC vandetta.
> That is
> far from the case. I have a soft spot in my heart for PPC and (esp)
> the new iMacs.
> BUT.
> PPC is, IMHO, the same as any other *FEATURE*. Yes, feature. And the
> biggest enemy
> to any release is feature creep. Nathan (and Tony and others) came to
> me a while back
> and asked about PPC support. I gave it several days of hard thought
> before saying no.
> I *want* it to happen. But, like all of the things that we want, it
> has to wait until post R1.
>
> Personally I don't think that even trying a port now makes any sense.
> Trying to port code
> that is being actively developed and created doesn't make a lot of
> sense, to me. Just like
> what Nathan and David Reid found today with their almost CVS
> collision. It would be far smarter,
> I think, for the PPC folks to learn and document their hardware.
> Maybe write some drivers. Work
> the outsides of the problem, instead of diving through the middle.
> Get YellowDog Linux and look
> at the drivers and the kernel to learn what Apple *should* be sharing
> with us. Help by writing x86 code
> for now. Be found that 99% of their code *just worked* on x86, coming
> from PPC. I will bet that,
> with GCC/PPC, we will find the same. When you jump the gun, sometimes
> it goes off.
And the one percent, as Be learned as well, was a complete PITA. Nor
can we write anything unless we have some code to base it on. Just
research? Come on, that's lame.
-Nathan
--
Fortune Cookie Says:
Remember, drive defensively! And of course, the best defense is a good
offense!
Other related posts:
