3D graphics programmers using Python?
lac at strakt.com
Fri Feb 7 23:59:45 CET 2003
> Laura Creighton wrote:
> > Up until last month I would have given unqualified support to the
> > statement 'if you can reduce your problem to something you can
> > code in c, _do it_.' Now it is qualified. I have been playing
> > with Boost, and that makes a lot of things easier.
> I can't imagine how any OO programmer would advocate dispensing with member
> data or inheritance. I use C only for the very, VERY lowest levels of
> pre-ASM coding, because it's easier to set up a plain old C function if
> you're going to drop down to pure ASM. I don't mean inline ASM, I mean your
> own standalone ASM functions where you have to set up either a C or C++
> function prototype. C prototypes are easier.
Yes. We may be in as close agreement as we are ever going to get, just
differing on what it means to 'be able to reduce your problem to something
you can code in C'. Though I also find the exercise of trying to do this,
even if you decide, 'nope, still need the classes' often makes the actual
> I wonder if a lot of our differences of opinion here, are between:
> - guys who use C++ as a high level language
> - guys who use C++ as a low level language
> I'm clearly the latter. As are all 3D graphics programmers who care about
This is very likely the basis of our disagreement. My position is
that C++ is not a general purpose or an applications programming
language. This doesn't mean that it shoudn't be used -- just that it
should be used one heck of a lot more rarely than it is now. And I
also hoped to find you a higher level language to program in, to boost
the 'Cool things coded by Brandon Van Every before he dies' count.
More information about the Python-list