Re: [Algorithms] General purpose task parallel threading approach

[Ola O. <ola...@gm...>]

You know guys, the sweng-gamedev has been without one of these endless flame 
wars for quite some time, why don't you move it there and leave the 
algorithms list in peace?

peace
.ola

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tony Cox" <to...@mi...>
To: "Game Development Algorithms" <gda...@li...>
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 9:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Algorithms] General purpose task parallel threading approach


>I think you guys are getting tied up in an argument about semantics.
>
> The real point here, IMHO, is that software development is a *tradeoff*. 
> There are many things we'd like in any piece of software:
>
> - Good performance (both in time and space)
> - Robustness
> - Maintainability
> - Shipped on time
> - Shipped on budget
> - Features
> - Interoperability
> - Testability
> - Portability
> - Reusability (perhaps this means being more rather than less general)
> - And many others.
>
> Clearly, holding all other variables equals, it's better to have more of 
> these good things than less. But you don't get to hold the other variables 
> equal - you're always trading off things against each other. Would I like 
> any piece of code I write to be more general purpose and more reusable? 
> Sure, but (a) do I even know that how to achieve that goal, and (b) am I 
> willing to trade off something else to get it? Maybe not. Perhaps almost 
> always not.
>
> - Tony
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: chr...@pl... 
> [mailto:chr...@pl...]
> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 11:14 AM
> To: Game Development Algorithms
> Subject: Re: [Algorithms] General purpose task parallel threading approach
>
>> "Other than classroom examples, software is NOT written through
>> composition of 'general components'. And even in the small subset
>> of software writing where your statement may hold true, writing
>> those components was a very small amount of work of the total."
>>
>> No, every piece of software in a modern language is written through
>> composition of "general components", from the machine code op-codes,
>> up to the language constructs they come from, up to the libraries,
>> patterns and algorithms they're constructed with.
>
> The fact that you have to rely on labelling assembly instructions
> and for-loops as "general components" to provide support for your
> initial statement shows how weak your statement was.
>
>
> Christer Ericson, Director of Tools and Technology
> Sony Computer Entertainment, Santa Monica
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Stay on top of everything new and different, both inside and
> around Java (TM) technology - register by April 22, and save
> $200 on the JavaOne (SM) conference, June 2-5, 2009, San Francisco.
> 300 plus technical and hands-on sessions. Register today.
> Use priority code J9JMT32. http://p.sf.net/sfu/p
> _______________________________________________
> GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> GDA...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
> Archives:
> http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=gdalgorithms-list
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Stay on top of everything new and different, both inside and
> around Java (TM) technology - register by April 22, and save
> $200 on the JavaOne (SM) conference, June 2-5, 2009, San Francisco.
> 300 plus technical and hands-on sessions. Register today.
> Use priority code J9JMT32. http://p.sf.net/sfu/p
> _______________________________________________
> GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> GDA...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
> Archives:
> http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=gdalgorithms-list