Pages: « 1 2
  Print  
Author Topic: GM's Data Structures  (Read 6621 times)
Offline (Male) RetroX
Reply #15 Posted on: September 01, 2011, 01:38:42 PM

Master of all things Linux
Contributor
Location: US
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1055
MSN Messenger - classixretrox@gmail.com
View Profile Email
I'm writing a Qt project right now, and I assure you that C++ data structures are WAY more difficult to learn and use than the GM's counterpart.
Um.

I literally see no difference.  Instead of:
Code: [Select]
var l = list_create();
list_add(l, 1);
you have:
Code: [Select]
vector<variant> l;
l.add(1);
Which is a whole lot easier to understand, in my opinion.  The only difference is an OO API versus a functional API, and an OO API makes a whole lot more sense in this instance.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2011, 01:42:33 PM by RetroX » Logged
My Box: Phenom II 3.4GHz X4 | ASUS ATI RadeonHD 5770, 1GB GDDR5 RAM | 1x4GB DDR3 SRAM | Arch Linux, x86_64 (Cube) / Windows 7 x64 (Blob)
Quote from: Fede-lasse
Why do all the pro-Microsoft people have troll avatars? :(
Offline (Male) Josh @ Dreamland
Reply #16 Posted on: September 01, 2011, 11:09:21 PM

Prince of all Goldfish
Developer
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2955

View Profile Email
Actually, you don't need the <variant>. You can use vector, vector<>, or vector<variant>; they're all the same.

But I can see how functions, technically using no types, could be easier for the GM crowd to understand. Even if they're far too verbose for the rest of us.

I will keep that in mind, though, plague.
Logged
"That is the single most cryptic piece of code I have ever seen." -Master PobbleWobble
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -Evelyn Beatrice Hall, Friends of Voltaire
Offline (Unknown gender) The 11th plague of Egypt
Reply #17 Posted on: September 02, 2011, 08:25:04 AM
Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 284

View Profile
I'm just saying I can handle both GML and C++ synthax, but a mix of the two could be tricky and counter-intuitive if rushed through.

Thank you for caring.
Logged
Offline (Male) RetroX
Reply #18 Posted on: September 02, 2011, 10:23:24 AM

Master of all things Linux
Contributor
Location: US
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1055
MSN Messenger - classixretrox@gmail.com
View Profile Email
But I can see how functions, technically using no types, could be easier for the GM crowd to understand. Even if they're far too verbose for the rest of us.
In all honesty, I think that they're easier for the advanced GM users, who know how to use them well, but not as much for the newer users that haven't used data structures before.  Either way, I suppose that it's good to have a functional API as well as an OO one.
Logged
My Box: Phenom II 3.4GHz X4 | ASUS ATI RadeonHD 5770, 1GB GDDR5 RAM | 1x4GB DDR3 SRAM | Arch Linux, x86_64 (Cube) / Windows 7 x64 (Blob)
Quote from: Fede-lasse
Why do all the pro-Microsoft people have troll avatars? :(
Offline (Male) Rusky
Reply #19 Posted on: September 02, 2011, 01:20:22 PM

Resident Troll
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 960
MSN Messenger - rpjohnst@gmail.com
View Profile WWW Email
It's really not very functional when you update the data structures in-place. I'd call it procedural.
Logged
Pages: « 1 2
  Print