Re: A89: Re: Survey for the next version of PlusShell

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: A89: Re: Survey for the next version of PlusShell


But what if developers are calling on a new function to be added?  What
about the developers that don't care about a "standard" library, and just
add their functions in anyways?  Are three libraries really all that much
that a user can't handle?  Come on!!  It will be easier to update three
smaller, related-function libraries, than one huge library.  If we were
trying to convince you to use 12-100 libraries, then I would see your point.
Only a programmer could keep track of what games use what libs, but three!!
How can you argue with that?  If there was a standard for displaying games
and game info such as:  (not limited to)

Program Creation Info
---------
Head Developed By: TCPA
 ti_alliance@listbot.com
Art By: TCPA
 ti_alliance@listbot.com
Game Design By: TCPA
 ti_alliance@listbot.com

Program Info
---------
Platform: TI-89
Title: TCPA BETA program
File Size: 101,213 bytes
Shell Required: None
Libraries used:
 x UTILLIB.89Z
 x HUFFLIB.89Z
   GFXLIB.89Z
Program Type: Game/Action
...etc.

I think you get the point by now...

-Miles Raymond

-----Original Message-----
From: Nathan Mueller <nlmueller@students.wisc.edu>
To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
Date: Sunday, November 15, 1998 12:12 PM
Subject: Re: A89: Re: Survey for the next version of PlusShell


>>I can understand that the user needs simplicity, however, making one giant
>>library would cause far more problems than it would solve.  Because from
time
>>to time developers would want to update libraries and having one big one
would
>>present problems.  The TI community would be swamped with many diffrent
>>incompatible large libraries.  But with the smaller libraries upgrading is
far
>>more easier.
>
>Not if we agree on a set of functions to include beforehand.  If we just
>stuck to those functions, upgrades would all be compatable and would only
>increase speed.  If we just agree on a common set of functions for one
>"master" library and put everything else inside programs we would probably
>save the most space since we are only putting the most commly used
>functions in a library.  Only having one library would be easier for the
>user to mannage and understand -- espically if they don't understand the
>point of functions.  As a developer you have to believe that users are
>idiots to create the best programs.
>
> --Nate
Follow-Ups: