"Working group participants" - or in other words those that actually works on the Vulkan specification. A step further than "just" supporting it.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Because if you go with Object Pascal, you're going to be constantly confusing your stringtypes and endianness.
I don't understand what you mean by this?
Pascal's a great teaching language (first thing I had formal training in), but since nobody's using it for modern deployment, the only thing you're really going to be able to transition to is Delphi.
Provably false. It isn't as popular as some languages but it is used for real world products.
Free Pascal is mostly Delphi compatible BTW.
Pre-C++11 is a nightmare, as it does so many things wrong OO-wise that I wouldn't really call it object oriented at all. 11+ begins to get more sane, and might be worth learning.
But if you do ObjectiveC, you can significantly add to the percentage of developers who can build for GNUStep
I'm not sure you understand what object orientation refers to in most languages - sure no (?) language that went from a structured to object orientated model are pure OO languages. But most people isn't interested in pure OO languages anyway, most just want abstract data types to be supported.
Some languages that aren't called object oriented but "just" object based essentially "just" support abstract data types. Those that then add inheritance are then called object oriented.
Exactly... While removing the parsing and some types of optimizations (common subexpression elimination etc.) helps somewhat there still needs to be optimizers and code generators in the driver. One just have to remember that GPU architectures vary greatly from explicitly scheduled VLIW to partially out of order execution throughput designs to realize that the code generator alone can be pretty complex.
I hope Vulkan will support pre-compiled and cached shaders. That could make a huge difference for some tasks.
And AMD, Nvidia, Intel, Samsung, EA, Apple,
Object Pascal that is. It's available in Free Pascal for a lot of operating systems and is a small and fast development environment.
I'm thinking of everything from the kernel architecture, command line, programs proper.
NB that he didn't connect every libertarian with the belief "that there should be no government regulations" - only the fucking idiot variety. IMHO that's true - only a fucking idiot can't learn from history that no regulation will not lead to a libertarian paradise, it will lead to anarchy and oppression.
Most Unix stuff doesn't follow the Unix "way of doing things"...
Wake up, this is the real world...
Software benefits are listed twice because they touch different things.
Direct X and things like proper joystick support since forever (Windows 3.1 IIRC) plus the fact that MS actually have produced some games themselves means that Windows simply was the best platform for gaming. This may have changed slightly lately but is still generally true.
And frankly I don't give a shit about the Windows 8 store - there's no need to target it.
But you, as an anonymous person posting without any reasoning or support at all is surely a more reliable source... *sigh*
Both of those are available without any sugar.
. A huge amount of software supports it including things there are _no_ open source software for
. Superb support for games including Direct* which most times have been superior to OpenGL/AL
. The standard user interface - almost everyone can use it
. Good keyboard support for GUI applications
. Developer friendly
Reference counting IS a form of GC.
The problem isn't actually that they aren't named: it's that they in most languages use a syntax that's harder to read than a local declaration would be: often the declaration of the function is done embedded in a parameter block, often with another kind of syntax compared to normal definitions.
And you don't have to identify and parse the function definition in the first example?!?
The first example is harder to parse at least for me. Not that it's a huge problem but readability problems tend to add up...
Right. I've only used Haskell and ML.
So exactly what does anonymous functions provide that local functions doesn't? I'm assuming a competent language with first class functions.