Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: BUG with Pouch (Belt)

Expand Messages
  • pjak
    ... it s Java. Well, I d have to say that it s more due to the design. Pcgen has simply outgrown the core design (For one thing, we keep re-parsing the same
    Message 1 of 35 , Jan 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, notmousse@a... wrote:
      >> cosmos3000 sez...
      >> 'Is the design of PCGen so crappy? Or is ist Java?'
      > I am not a lemur (ok I am, but not a code lemur), but I'd guess
      it's Java.

      Well, I'd have to say that it's more due to the design. Pcgen has
      simply outgrown the core design (For one thing, we keep re-parsing
      the same strings from the lst file over and over again rather than
      doing it once and for all and storing the result.) Thankfully, some
      people are working on improving things in that area.

      > Something about compiling on the fly just doesn't jive with speed.
      Or at least
      > that's how it was explained to me.

      Not quite true. While it is, indeed, highly unlikely that a java
      program could compete with a lovingly hand-crafted heavily optimized
      c program, there is no particular reason that a java program should
      be noticeably slower for most tasks (including what pcgen does.)

      /Jonas
    • Sigurdur H. Olafsson
      A little on user friendlyness here. Would it be possible to make Name the default for Sort Equipment on the Equipping? (Instead of Type) I think it is the
      Message 35 of 35 , Jan 1, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        A little on user friendlyness here.
        Would it be possible to make Name the default for "Sort Equipment" on
        the Equipping? (Instead of Type)

        I think it is the view that makes the most sense for this tab, it
        gives you the best overview of the stuff you have already purchased
        under the Gear tab.

        --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, "merton_monk" <merton_monk@y...> wrote:
        > --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, "Jayme Cox" <jayme@r...> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > IMO, this could be done simply just as Jayme says
        > > > without changing the nature of Equipment objects at all.
        > >
        > > Ross is correct, it wasn't hard to do after all. Code CVS'ed for
        > next autobuild.
        >
        > Cool - so people can grab the alpha and have a look to see if they
        > have any feedback. Thanks for the fast work, Jayme! :)
        >
        > -Bryan
        >
        > >
        > > --Jayme
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.