Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!peter
From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re:   8-bit death
Message-ID: <1991May27.130057.27121@sugar.hackercorp.com>
Organization: Sugar Land Unix -- Houston, TX
References: <mykes.2824@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> <1991May25.121511.24184@sugar.hackercorp.com> <mykes.2906@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG>
Date: Mon, 27 May 1991 13:00:57 GMT

In article <mykes.2906@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes:
> Aren't you the same Peter da Silva who posted an article to
> comp.sys.amiga.programmer griping about how difficult it is to port
> between Manx and Lattice/SAS? :)

No, I'm the same Peter da Silva griping about people writing non-portable
programs, so I have to do their work for them. In fact in the very message
you're responding to (though you have "cleverly" refrained from quoting it)
I point out that it's not the least bit difficult to write non-portable code
in any language. The opposite... that it's even possible to write portable
code in some languages... is not true.

Ignoring people's points is not only rude, it's stupid.

> Anyhow, even in your DisplayImage routine, you will call BlitBitMap() or
> whatever, and it will still need to be rewritten.

Yes. One O/S interface routine gets rewritten. The rest of the code just gets
recompiled. It's a whole lot easier than rewriting all the code that uses
BitBltBitMapLeftCornerPocketCueBall().
-- 
Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
<peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
