Re: XML was RE: [GD-General] RE: A portable preferences library

[Jorrit T. <Jor...@uz...>]

Gareth Lewin wrote:

>
>So what ? You are still doing processes on the data that are not required.
>Come on this is typical programming logic here, you don't have every
>function in your code recompute all of it's data do you ? Its the same
>thing.
>  
>
It is a matter of priorities. We don't think load time is a priority. We 
think runtime
performance is much more important. We don't have that much time to 
spend on our project.
We like to spend that time on the things that are most important.

>Lets not ignore the fact that loading bits of the level is way easier with a
>binary specific format that can be dumped directly into data structures.
>  
>
Yes but that's not portable. CS has to run on all kinds of operating 
systems and cpu's. We can't
dump binary structures like that. The endianess wouldn't be correct and 
padding can differ
too.

Greetings,