pouët.net

>someone is obviously abusing optimus' account :D

How the hell do I make people believe that? Only Optimus makes it possible..

the biggest problem in d3dx is that it's not in dll so it sux in 64k :)

and that horrible C-like interface :|

C++ all ze way (and yes i know a lot of people write sloppy C++ 3dmath code with too many tempoaries, but it could have easily have been made to avoid that)

d3dx sucks because the code model just dont fit in.. not anywhere (hopefully)...

about ripping code or whatever you call it i wouldnt care less.. if you can rip stuff and put into your engine/whatever, your engine is however most likely really ugly and crappy >P

and for kb: anyone seriously saying .NET is bad/lame or so obviously has NEVER used it or is just a fucked up lamer yelling "assSEEMbler iS SooOOOo fUCkiNg c0000l!" ... then again, i dont think you where serious since i never seen you write with numbers on irc :-)

D3DX gives you plenty of speed and control. The math code will use MMX/SSE/SSE2/3DNow! isntructions where appropriate and its so low-level I don't see how you could need "more control".

Contorl is an illusion anyway. You are at the mercy of the OS, API, DDI, driver, HW design, etc.

If speed and control are your mantra, you shouldn't even be writing software, but doing hardware demos.

sssssh. (soon)


... well eventually

sigh, i'm not even going to answer that pc-demo-coding-centric rant legalize. control is *not* an illusion, not even on the PC platform. it's an illusion for those who don't know what's going on.

plek: fine, then code a demo that magically upgrades your CPU, motherboard and display adapter and make a zillion bucks. Oh wait, you can't because you can't control everything.

legalize: come on. You were writing about software limitations, plek said that you could overcome these, and you really dare try to tell anyone that the topic was hardware limitations?

Sorry, that was TOO obvious.

I mean, it's no miracle that plek and I like, uh, "discussing" with you, as you take EACH and EVERY chance to prove that you're right and the other one is not. Most other people treated my initial "d3dx is for l4merz" comment like the joke that it was. You did not, and for SUCH dumb motives...

... please. Despite most of you Americans we Euro people are actually able to read more than one sentence per hour and understand the context. Don't forget that if you try arguing here.

Please, you're laughable! Where did i mention the word *everything*? I mean, come on, you sound very simple.



So that implies the code is useful for each and every task in respect to it's functional spectrum? You really haven't done any real optimizing now have you? Just a bunch of buzzwords won't cut it. It's not too hard to pick up knowledge about the anomalies of an OS, the optimal way of using an API or the right treatment of hardware. Regarding (non-)interactive audiovisual software, one of the primary goals is to get your code to do as much as possible in the least cycles. This is not obtained by simply stating dumb shit like "oh this library has some functions that are optimized using SSE, so if I use this, it really can't get any faster!". Look farther than that nose of yours, will you? Because if you don't, you'll never get one step further than this.

There is no single solution to any problem within this spectrum of software development, and every platform or approach or whatnot has it's downs, *and* it's exploitable pro's. Experience broadens your ability to determine the optimal approach to problems. Simply denying the existence of possiblities by saying that "you're not abled to properly take control of the situation on the PC platform" probably made you look more stupid than you deserve.

I probably really can't blame you for being the shortsighted prick you are, we've all been there, but please, if you want to act big-time, make some sensible comments instead of those.

In no way do I want to imply that I am allknowing, but at least *that* stage belongs to my past.

And now I'll go get some sleep.

kb: nope. The statements you attribute to me are not statements I made.

plek: yes, I have. The statements you attribute to me are not statements I made.

I'm happy to debate the subject, but you'll have to stick to what I actually said and not some made up strawman point that you vanquish.

*I* control everything. You are all my puppets.

"
D3DX gives you plenty of speed and control. The math code will use MMX/SSE/SSE2/3DNow! isntructions where appropriate and its so low-level I don't see how you could need "more control".

Contorl is an illusion anyway. You are at the mercy of the OS, API, DDI, driver, HW design, etc.
"

Good to hear you no longer stick to this bullshit.

(and if that remains your reaction to mine, placed in the context of someone actually using d3dx's vector maths (probably for real-time purposes), that would not be one professionals would approve of)

Did someone said Spectrum? I guess that's the answer. ZX Speccy ownz jur 4abstr4ct1onz!!!

My vector library uses all the latest acronyms; CPU, FPU, RAM, DVD...

lets face it, if your engine doesn't have 'extreme' in it's name, it sucks, and the marketing people are gonna drop it.

psonice: shouldn't that be 'x-treme' ? ;-D

i'd prefer a templated math library over a crappy c interface anyday..

then again.. iam not american :-)

But you are dressed as one!