I’ve always found it really sad that the C preprocessor doesn’t provide the one thing preprocessors are really useful for, which is .incbin (include_bytes! in Rust) The lack of it even led to abominations such as the XBM image format!
-
-
Replying to @pcwalton
What exactly is desired here? Do you want to write something like... byte blob[]=static_load_bytes("filename.bin") Rather than being a preprocessor thing, it could be compile-time execution of constructs in the compile-time file environment rather than runtime.
3 replies 2 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @TimSweeneyEpic @pcwalton
`std::embed` for C++ was almost a thing, but the story of how the committee punted that is now a story of infamy (people cited some nonsensical concerns about "security risks")
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
i like to use it as an example when ppl say "why don't you write a proposal" :)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
The other interpretation is that the room doesn't have the right representation. Game devs (myself included) aren't as represented as tech firms that are willing to expend the capital to send representatives as champions for their interests.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @m_ninepoints @nice_byte and
Furthermore, most game devs are REALLY weak when it comes to "standardese" (myself included) when it comes to knowing all the corner cases now necessary to change what is a 1000+ page specification.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @m_ninepoints @nice_byte and
I know this because I often seem game dev twitter rants about C++ that are sadly misinformed, and I don't blame any one party really, it's just an unfortunate state of affairs (and I'm in the same boat)
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @m_ninepoints @nice_byte and
The worst aspect of the proverbial boat we’re in though, is that abstaining from the process sort of denies us the right to complain. Personally, I’d love it if major studios (and Epic) had capital to invest in the participation of internal C++ gurus.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I think the way that C++ standardization is based so much on in-person meetings makes this worse. It’s a way of gatekeeping the process to big companies who can afford flights, and it selects for people who spend all their time doing standards work instead of practitioners.
1 reply 1 retweet 10 likes
Doing more work online doesn’t completely fix the problem—big companies can still exercise undue influence simply by sending huge numbers of staff to drown out all other voices. (This is causing trouble in Web standards right now.) But lightweight processes help.
-
-
Completely agree here. The cost of participation is unduly high in an internet age.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.