Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SteamWake
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins
Their choice to go with a revolutionary strategy "all new code" instead of an evolutionary and modular production shows that they have no long-term committment to excellence.
|
I dont follow this logic.
The choice to stick with old code would be better?
Im pretty sure they intend to take advantage of DX10 and other 'new' technologies.
Meh its vaporware at the moment anyhow. |
The logic to stick with old code is basically along the lines of "Better the devil you know...." Theoretically, they have found the most glaring bugs in this codebase (not all the bugs, mind you), therefore they can build on what they know to be a firmer foundation. Building in DX10 shouldn't be too hard, assuming the code is written modularly as RR mentioned. If it's too hard, it's a sign that the code isn't orthangonal (A fancy word to say each change has a minimum number of unintended side-effects). In that case, it's a nightmare waiting to happen and "All new codebase" may be the only way to go.
__________________
*While troubleshooting a printer at work
Me: "Do you want me to run the copies through again?"
Boss: "Hold on, let me go get the alcohol first.
Me:
