Jump to content
Posted 19 November 2012 - 09:05 AM
Posted 19 November 2012 - 10:33 AM
Posted 19 November 2012 - 10:52 AM
Posted 19 November 2012 - 12:48 PM
Posted 19 November 2012 - 01:41 PM
Not in my experience.
Is this one of the main reasons why people tend to reinvent the wheel in programming, because they actually don't want to bloat the programming with X, Y, and Z all integrated into the project, else they would have to remember what each X, Y, and Z does what?
Check out my book, Game Development with Unity, aimed at beginners who want to build fun games fast.
Also check out my personal website at bryanwagstaff.com, where I occasionally write about assorted stuff.
Posted 19 November 2012 - 02:44 PM
Posted 19 November 2012 - 03:27 PM
Would there be a point in the development phase where having too much libraries can actually worsen the development?
Posted 20 November 2012 - 06:41 AM
Edited by Karsten_, 20 November 2012 - 06:47 AM.
Posted 20 November 2012 - 08:28 AM
I tend to see that "reinventing wheels" and "implementing libraries" are like optimizations.
Like SuperVGA mentioned, reinventing the wheel makes the creator of the same wheel more understandable about the scenes behind it, and gives a finer control over the logical flow of the program. To be, it has always been a lull for me when reinventing a wheel so many times, even though I get to see what's behind all this, and how it gets to behave.
I'm thinking that if you were to continuously add more "libraries" to a program, in turn, the program's size will "bloat" itself up.
By defining "bloat", I'm making the assumption that if a program were to embed some amounts of libraries, for a casual techie user of the program, it may seems to be full of "bloat", for example, VS redistributables included in installation wizards, some redundant drivers in some HP printer series, etc. They may not be libraries, but if we were to look at it and do a little comparsion, you can see that it sort-of fits the "library" description.
This is how I started my ponderments.
Posted 20 November 2012 - 10:19 AM
Edited by mhagain, 20 November 2012 - 10:19 AM.
It appears that the gentleman thought C++ was extremely difficult and he was overjoyed that the machine was absorbing it; he understood that good C++ is difficult but the best C++ is well-nigh unintelligible.