I'm from a time (late 70's) when you could depend on there being 32k of memory, and in most business systems 64k with another 64k for use as memory storage and ram drive space. This meant programmers had to write tight, fast, efficient code for CP/M and MP/M systems.
fast forward to now and I find that software houses would rather force the user to buy memory and fast systems because it is much cheaper than paying programmers to write that tight, fast, and efficient code.
I realize that OOP has made life easier in some ways as a programmer, but, and it's a big but, you inherit all of the slop and bugs in the base objects that you use. It's true that I miss procedural programming, but I do see the value of OOP as well.
For Android, I argued long and hard for Google to adopt Xorg's Xwindows for RISC systems instead of Dalvik, but I didn't have the juice to carry enough weight in the early stages of Android. My contention was that by going with xwindows, 100's of thousands of Linux programs were either instantly compatible, or could be easily ported. Also Android would inherit true multi-tasking and multi-user capabilities with proven resource efficiency.
Unfortunately, Google bought the rights to Dalvik and here we are today. My job was to build Kernel modules and shared object libraries for the base Linux system and not Dalvik, so at the time it didn't affect me in the least.
This rant has no real purpose, but I just read through another rant in the Bugs and Wish forum and thought it deserved more generic discussion without bringing B4A into the mix. So, feel free to rant here and/or tell me how backward and stuck in the past I am.
--- Jem
fast forward to now and I find that software houses would rather force the user to buy memory and fast systems because it is much cheaper than paying programmers to write that tight, fast, and efficient code.
I realize that OOP has made life easier in some ways as a programmer, but, and it's a big but, you inherit all of the slop and bugs in the base objects that you use. It's true that I miss procedural programming, but I do see the value of OOP as well.
For Android, I argued long and hard for Google to adopt Xorg's Xwindows for RISC systems instead of Dalvik, but I didn't have the juice to carry enough weight in the early stages of Android. My contention was that by going with xwindows, 100's of thousands of Linux programs were either instantly compatible, or could be easily ported. Also Android would inherit true multi-tasking and multi-user capabilities with proven resource efficiency.
Unfortunately, Google bought the rights to Dalvik and here we are today. My job was to build Kernel modules and shared object libraries for the base Linux system and not Dalvik, so at the time it didn't affect me in the least.
This rant has no real purpose, but I just read through another rant in the Bugs and Wish forum and thought it deserved more generic discussion without bringing B4A into the mix. So, feel free to rant here and/or tell me how backward and stuck in the past I am.
--- Jem