Re: [9fans] Compiling ken-cc on Linux

[lucio@proxima.alt.za]

> I think the issue is trying to fix a broken problem.  Perfect
> compatibility is pretty much impossible, but most attempts done to fix
> it just shift the pain to somewhere else.  What's the quote about
> complexity not disappearing, just moving around?

Basically, increased CPU complexity provides increased performance,
which is then used to provide features that only unskilled users could
wish for.  I once described the syndrome as "I can't figure how this
application works, but the next release will be easier to use".

I remember using AutoCad 2.6 on an 8086 with a floating point
accelerator and being impressed by the speed of its 3D rendering.  I
have no idea how AutoCad behaves these days, but faster rendering
would imply finishing before it even started.  So where is the real
improvement?

Sadly, we developers buy all the hype just like uneducated users.
Another example: I switched from XYWrite to Brief 1.something because
the latter was as fast, but in addition it handled backspace in
replace mode correctly (XYWrite pulled back the remainder of the line,
where Brief actually replaced the precedingcharacter with a space and
moved the cursor under it).  Brief 2.1 was better, with worthwhile
improvements, whereas 3.1 was a dog.  I never promoted myself to it,
No doubt, the developer had made enough money from users like me to
afford a 386 PC and forgot that I would not have access to one :-(

In summary, we have the resources, we may as well squander them.  And
those who can't afford them?  "Let them eat cake!".

Lucio.