On Freitag 25 September 2009, Oliver Schmidt wrote: > >> If your conio implementations are contained within one file (for > >> example, because all they replace is putchar), they would definitely > >> qualify for this approach. If they're contained in multiple modules, > >> this becomes too complex, and I would rather suggest adding them as a > >> project to the cc65 contrib section. > > > > the replace several modules, just putchar isnt enough. clrscr is another, > > an init call is needed too (in a constructor) since the 80 colums one > > uses hires mode, and a few more (dont recall exactly). mmmh > > Just my two cents... > > I see two primary reasons for distributing code into modules: > a) Allow the linker to only link in what is actually needed > b) Source code maintainance [...] > Obviously this only makes sense if the code in question isn't that > large and/or it can presumed that using some of if more or less > implies using all/most of it... ofcourse, but that isnt the case. i replace modules which are also modules in the original lib, and most of them are independent (clrscr for example) i dont quite understand what the problem is with linking additional libraries though :) except that it would require splitting the lib into several libs and not put everything into one - which IMHO isnt the optimal approach, as it is kinda limiting. -- http://www.hitmen-console.org http://magicdisk.untergrund.net http://www.pokefinder.org http://ftp.pokefinder.org Easy to learn = hard to use, Easy to use = hard to learn, Easy to learn and use = won't do what you want it to, Powerful = hard to learn and use, Menu-driven = easy to learn. <Stephen Manes> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.Received on Fri Sep 25 10:17:47 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2009-09-25 10:17:49 CEST