OpenEuphoria

Re: Why I need to use C for screen graphics

• Posted by Andrew Katz <Akatz712 at gmail.com> Apr 30, 2007
• 476 views

Pete Lomax wrote:
> 
> Andrew Katz wrote:
> > still 60% slower.
> I still read that as good, well actually, amazing. Bad point is Eu creates a
> sequence to call a c_func, good point is it checks no of args, whether
> func/proc,
> etc, and if it craps out on you most times it says straightaway what line it
> died on, and if not, trace(3) does. C gives few clues.
> 
> > Note that for most applications this is not an issue. But my application
> > needs to write thousands of tiny little lines to make curved shapes.
> Agreed; there are times to resort to a crappy but fast language.
> I write quite a bit in asm, btw, no matter my bitches over trace(), and I get
> that OllyDbg is just about as good as it could be, I actually really like it,
> but basically it still sucks in comparison.
> 
> Regards,
> Pete

Debugging assembly language. That is a scary thought. I like the Watcom C level
debugger. However, debugging a DLL is a challenge. I needed to make it an
application with just a function call, and plug in numbers for when it is called.

But since this is a Euphoria forum, we can say that Euphoria is great because of
the efforts of people here. And the community here is the best I have ever seen
for any language or tool set. This forum in particular is brilliant. Other sites
segregate the forum into groups. But here it is all in one place.

Andy Katz
B.S. Computer Science, 1978
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI)