[Scummvm-devel] Dreamweb for 1.5.0?

[Matthew Hoops]

Forwarding to -devel, as whoozle seems to have only included myself on this one


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Vladimir Menshakov <whoozle at yandex.ru>
Date: 2011/11/13
Subject: Re: [Scummvm-devel] Dreamweb for 1.5.0?
To: Matthew Hoops <clone2727 at gmail.com>




13.11.2011, 23:13, "Matthew Hoops" <clone2727 at gmail.com>:
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Vladimir Menshakov <whoozle at yandex.ru> wrote:
>
>>  It was completable since addition to the trunk. :) But I think you could forget about it. Many people here too bothered with HOW it was added. And they does not care about the scummvm users and does not care about the mission of the scummvm, but only for their egoes. All moaning about stability and support (of dreamweb engine) are now looked like BS to me. The main work in the engine had been done (after I'd lost my motivation, because of stupid drama here) by the new guy and he prove it.
>
> Yes, there IS a problem with how it was added. It's not enough that
> one just gets to the destination, the journey counts too. In this
> case, we expect *clean* code in our engines and not just some quick
> asm->C++ conversion. That's not coding, that's an excuse. It was
> expected that when the engine was added that it would be cleaned up;
> something that you didn't do.
What makes you think that generated code is not clean?
>
> And, tbh, you have no right to complain about the drama. You're the
> cause of it because you didn't want anyone to say anything about the
> sloppiness of the code.
>
> I am very grateful to Bertrand for trying to make an engine out of a
> total mess, something which you and your giant ego were too big to
> tackle.
>
>>  Anyway, thanks for the attention. Please keep asking, I don't like losing my time and contribution because of some nerdy reasons came out of thin air.
>
> Yes, code cleanliness is some "nerdy reason" that we just pulled out
> of "thin air".
Define "clean", please. :)
>
> -Matt