Tillbaka till svenska Fidonet
English   Information   Debug  
OS2BBS   0/787
OS2DOSBBS   0/580
OS2HW   0/42
OS2INET   0/37
OS2LAN   0/134
OS2PROG   0/36
OS2REXX   0/113
OS2USER-L   207
OS2   0/4785
OSDEBATE   0/18996
PASCAL   0/490
PERL   0/457
PHP   0/45
POINTS   0/405
POLITICS   0/29554
POL_INC   0/14731
PSION   103
R20_ADMIN   1117
R20_AMATORRADIO   0/2
R20_BEST_OF_FIDONET   13
R20_CHAT   0/893
R20_DEPP   0/3
R20_DEV   399
R20_ECHO2   1379
R20_ECHOPRES   0/35
R20_ESTAT   0/719
R20_FIDONETPROG...
...RAM.MYPOINT   0/2
R20_FIDONETPROGRAM   0/22
R20_FIDONET   0/248
R20_FILEFIND   0/24
R20_FILEFOUND   0/22
R20_HIFI   0/3
R20_INFO2   2785
R20_INTERNET   0/12940
R20_INTRESSE   0/60
R20_INTR_KOM   0/99
R20_KANDIDAT.CHAT   42
R20_KANDIDAT   28
R20_KOM_DEV   112
R20_KONTROLL   0/13062
R20_KORSET   0/18
R20_LOKALTRAFIK   0/24
R20_MODERATOR   0/1852
R20_NC   76
R20_NET200   245
R20_NETWORK.OTH...
...ERNETS   0/13
R20_OPERATIVSYS...
...TEM.LINUX   0/44
R20_PROGRAMVAROR   0/1
R20_REC2NEC   534
R20_SFOSM   0/340
R20_SF   0/108
R20_SPRAK.ENGLISH   0/1
R20_SQUISH   107
R20_TEST   2
R20_WORST_OF_FIDONET   12
RAR   0/9
RA_MULTI   106
RA_UTIL   0/162
REGCON.EUR   0/2055
REGCON   0/13
SCIENCE   0/1206
SF   0/239
SHAREWARE_SUPPORT   0/5146
SHAREWRE   0/14
SIMPSONS   0/169
STATS_OLD1   0/2539.065
STATS_OLD2   0/2530
STATS_OLD3   0/2395.095
STATS_OLD4   0/1692.25
SURVIVOR   0/495
SYSOPS_CORNER   0/3
SYSOP   0/84
TAGLINES   0/112
TEAMOS2   0/4530
TECH   0/2617
TEST.444   0/105
TRAPDOOR   0/19
TREK   0/755
TUB   0/290
UFO   0/40
UNIX   0/1316
USA_EURLINK   0/102
USR_MODEMS   0/1
VATICAN   0/2740
VIETNAM_VETS   0/14
VIRUS   0/378
VIRUS_INFO   0/201
VISUAL_BASIC   0/473
WHITEHOUSE   0/5187
WIN2000   0/101
WIN32   0/30
WIN95   0/4277
WIN95_OLD1   0/70272
WINDOWS   0/1517
WWB_SYSOP   0/419
WWB_TECH   0/810
ZCC-PUBLIC   0/1
ZEC   4

 
4DOS   0/134
ABORTION   0/7
ALASKA_CHAT   0/506
ALLFIX_FILE   0/1313
ALLFIX_FILE_OLD1   0/7997
ALT_DOS   0/152
AMATEUR_RADIO   0/1039
AMIGASALE   0/14
AMIGA   0/331
AMIGA_INT   0/1
AMIGA_PROG   0/20
AMIGA_SYSOP   0/26
ANIME   0/15
ARGUS   0/924
ASCII_ART   0/340
ASIAN_LINK   0/651
ASTRONOMY   0/417
AUDIO   0/92
AUTOMOBILE_RACING   0/105
BABYLON5   0/17862
BAG   135
BATPOWER   0/361
BBBS.ENGLISH   0/382
BBSLAW   0/109
BBS_ADS   0/5290
BBS_INTERNET   0/507
BIBLE   0/3563
BINKD   0/1119
BINKLEY   0/215
BLUEWAVE   0/2173
CABLE_MODEMS   0/25
CBM   0/46
CDRECORD   0/66
CDROM   0/20
CLASSIC_COMPUTER   0/378
COMICS   0/15
CONSPRCY   0/899
COOKING   28443
COOKING_OLD1   0/24719
COOKING_OLD2   0/40862
COOKING_OLD3   0/37489
COOKING_OLD4   0/35496
COOKING_OLD5   9370
C_ECHO   0/189
C_PLUSPLUS   0/31
DIRTY_DOZEN   0/201
DOORGAMES   0/2014
DOS_INTERNET   0/196
duplikat   6000
ECHOLIST   0/18295
EC_SUPPORT   0/318
ELECTRONICS   0/359
ELEKTRONIK.GER   1534
ENET.LINGUISTIC   0/13
ENET.POLITICS   0/4
ENET.SOFT   0/11701
ENET.SYSOP   33805
ENET.TALKS   0/32
ENGLISH_TUTOR   0/2000
EVOLUTION   0/1335
FDECHO   0/217
FDN_ANNOUNCE   0/7068
FIDONEWS   23539
FIDONEWS_OLD1   0/49742
FIDONEWS_OLD2   0/35949
FIDONEWS_OLD3   0/30874
FIDONEWS_OLD4   0/37224
FIDO_SYSOP   12847
FIDO_UTIL   0/180
FILEFIND   0/209
FILEGATE   0/212
FILM   0/18
FNEWS_PUBLISH   4193
FN_SYSOP   41525
FN_SYSOP_OLD1   71952
FTP_FIDO   0/2
FTSC_PUBLIC   0/13584
FUNNY   0/4886
GENEALOGY.EUR   0/71
GET_INFO   105
GOLDED   0/408
HAM   0/16053
HOLYSMOKE   0/6791
HOT_SITES   0/1
HTMLEDIT   0/71
HUB203   466
HUB_100   264
HUB_400   39
HUMOR   0/29
IC   0/2851
INTERNET   0/424
INTERUSER   0/3
IP_CONNECT   719
JAMNNTPD   0/233
JAMTLAND   0/47
KATTY_KORNER   0/41
LAN   0/16
LINUX-USER   0/19
LINUXHELP   0/1155
LINUX   0/22011
LINUX_BBS   0/957
mail   18.68
mail_fore_ok   249
MENSA   0/341
MODERATOR   0/102
MONTE   0/992
MOSCOW_OKLAHOMA   0/1245
MUFFIN   0/783
MUSIC   0/321
N203_STAT   900
N203_SYSCHAT   313
NET203   321
NET204   69
NET_DEV   0/10
NORD.ADMIN   0/101
NORD.CHAT   0/2572
NORD.FIDONET   189
NORD.HARDWARE   0/28
NORD.KULTUR   0/114
NORD.PROG   0/32
NORD.SOFTWARE   0/88
NORD.TEKNIK   0/58
NORD   0/453
OCCULT_CHAT   0/93
Möte OSDEBATE, 18996 texter
 lista första sista föregående nästa 
Text 5054, 130 rader
Skriven 2005-06-16 21:39:12 av Rich (1:379/45)
   Kommentar till text 5042 av Geo (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: Everyone should take a pay cut
==========================================
From: "Rich" <@>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_01B3_01C572BB.D6694080
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   No.  I did not mention complexity at all.  My point is simple.  You =
get more.  More functionality.  More content.

   As for you claim of writing in ASM, I have to disappoint you.  =
Nowadays may not need to look far for programmers that are comfortable = in
writing ASM but back in the day it was not uncommon and not that big = a deal. 
If more programmers aren't comfortable with it today it is = because they don't
have the experience.

   In regard to size comparisons with ASM, I think you are way out of =
whack.  Again, back in the day a major reason for using ASM was size.  I =
guess that the advantage for writing in ASM instead of C was tops 30% = and
less more likely.  The size advantage is pretty much gone because = compilers
have gotten that much better.  As or more important the = compilers have the
speed advantage most of the time.  It used to be when = processors were simpler
that the rules to write efficient code were = simpler.  You could simply count
cycles in your head.  Also, size often = related directly to speed.  Today the
rules are complex and compilers do = a good job of optimizing for these.

   So to repeat, my point is that the current version of a product back =
when memory and disk was 1000x more expensive contains much more than = that
old version even if you pay the same.

Rich

  "Geo" <georger@nls.net> wrote in message news:42b2206e$1@w3.nls.net...


  I think you missed my point, Rich's claim was that programs are more =
complex
  because they take up more space and gave an example of 600Mb for XP. =
So how
  long in man hours do you think it would take to write 600Mb in ASM? Ok =
now
  has programming become 1000X more efficient or hasn't it using Rich's =
"size
  matters" logic?

  Geo.


------=_NextPart_000_01B3_01C572BB.D6694080
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2668" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp; No.&nbsp; I did not =
mention complexity=20
at all.&nbsp; My point is simple.&nbsp; You get more.&nbsp; More=20
functionality.&nbsp; More content.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp; As for you claim of =
writing in ASM, I=20
have to disappoint you.&nbsp; Nowadays may not need to look far for =
programmers=20
that are comfortable in writing ASM but back in the day it was not = uncommon
and=20
not that big a deal.&nbsp; If more programmers aren't comfortable with = it
today=20
it is because they don't have the experience.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp; In regard to size =
comparisons with=20
ASM, I think you are way out of whack.&nbsp; Again, back in the day a =
major=20
reason for using ASM was size.&nbsp; I guess that the advantage for = writing
in=20
ASM instead of C was tops 30% and less more likely.&nbsp; The size = advantage
is=20
pretty much gone because compilers have gotten that much better.&nbsp; = As
or=20
more important the compilers have the speed advantage most of the = time.&nbsp;
It=20
used to be when processors were simpler that the rules to write = efficient
code=20
were simpler.&nbsp; You could simply count cycles in your head.&nbsp; = Also,
size=20
often related directly to speed.&nbsp; Today the rules are complex and =
compilers=20
do&nbsp;a good job of optimizing for these.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp; So to repeat, my point is =
that the=20
current version of a product back when memory and disk was 1000x more =
expensive=20
contains much more than that old version even if you pay the =
same.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV>"Geo" &lt;<A =
href=3D"mailto:georger@nls.net">georger@nls.net</A>&gt; wrote=20
  in message <A=20
  =
href=3D"news:42b2206e$1@w3.nls.net">news:42b2206e$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V><BR><BR>I=20
  think you missed my point, Rich's claim was that programs are more=20
  complex<BR>because they take up more space and gave an example of =
600Mb for=20
  XP. So how<BR>long in man hours do you think it would take to write =
600Mb in=20
  ASM? Ok now<BR>has programming become 1000X more efficient or hasn't =
it using=20
  Rich's "size<BR>matters" =
logic?<BR><BR>Geo.<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_01B3_01C572BB.D6694080--

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
 * Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)