C++ Certification

[b][red]This message was edited by saengsunhoi at 2004-10-12 20:31:6[/red][/b][hr]
Sorry. I do not know where to ask this.

I have programmed C/C++ for many years, but I have no certification. I found http://www.ncsacademy.com offering certification tests. I passed. They ask 24USD for a certificate after passing the test. You have an opinion about this website? It is real or fake?

I thank you for help. If this is not appropriate, I apologize.


Comments

  • : I have programmed C/C++ for many years, but I have no certification.
    : I found http://www.ncsacademy.com offering certification tests. I
    : passed. They ask 24USD for a certificate after passing the test.
    : You have an opinion about this website? It is real or fake?

    Let me guess, your results look like this?
    [code=ffffff]
    [b]Certification Exam Results[/b]

    Basic C++ Elements 4.0
    Classes / Advanced Techniques 4.0
    Code Comprehension / Debugging 4.0
    [b]Total Score 4.0[/b]
    [/code]Yeah, I just took the test. I timed myself: under 3 minutes, which is about 5 seconds per question, and that was taking my time.

    That "certificate" is worthless. If an employer followed up on the source of the certificate, they might even think less of you because you were so easily robbed of $25. ;)

    What a nice racket, though. Put up a tiny, low bandwidth website that [italic]charges[/italic] people for taking a 35 question survey, then just sit back and collect free money. Zero maintenance.

  • : : I have programmed C/C++ for many years, but I have no certification.
    : : I found http://www.ncsacademy.com offering certification tests. I
    : : passed. They ask 24USD for a certificate after passing the test.
    : : You have an opinion about this website? It is real or fake?
    :
    : Let me guess, your results look like this?
    : [code=ffffff]
    : [b]Certification Exam Results[/b]
    :
    : Basic C++ Elements 4.0
    : Classes / Advanced Techniques 4.0
    : Code Comprehension / Debugging 4.0
    : [b]Total Score 4.0[/b]
    : [/code]Yeah, I just took the test. I timed myself: under 3 minutes, which is about 5 seconds per question, and that was taking my time.
    :
    : That "certificate" is worthless. If an employer followed up on the source of the certificate, they might even think less of you because you were so easily robbed of $25. ;)
    :
    : What a nice racket, though. Put up a tiny, low bandwidth website that [italic]charges[/italic] people for taking a 35 question survey, then just sit back and collect free money. Zero maintenance.
    :
    :


    It does bring up a point that I have often wondered about. Why isn't there some sort of valid certification for programmers like there is in other fields? Some would say that a college degree/coursework should qualify, but I have hired programmers from the local community college that clearly did not have the skills to program real world applications/devices. I would like to hear from others just what criteria (generally) should be necessary towards a valid programmers certification.
  • : : : I have programmed C/C++ for many years, but I have no certification.
    : : : I found http://www.ncsacademy.com offering certification tests. I
    : : : passed. They ask 24USD for a certificate after passing the test.
    : : : You have an opinion about this website? It is real or fake?
    : :
    : : Let me guess, your results look like this?
    : : [code=ffffff]
    : : [b]Certification Exam Results[/b]
    : :
    : : Basic C++ Elements 4.0
    : : Classes / Advanced Techniques 4.0
    : : Code Comprehension / Debugging 4.0
    : : [b]Total Score 4.0[/b]
    : : [/code]Yeah, I just took the test. I timed myself: under 3 minutes, which is about 5 seconds per question, and that was taking my time.
    : :
    : : That "certificate" is worthless. If an employer followed up on the source of the certificate, they might even think less of you because you were so easily robbed of $25. ;)
    : :
    : : What a nice racket, though. Put up a tiny, low bandwidth website that [italic]charges[/italic] people for taking a 35 question survey, then just sit back and collect free money. Zero maintenance.
    : :
    : :
    :
    :
    : It does bring up a point that I have often wondered about. Why isn't there some sort of valid certification for programmers like there is in other fields? Some would say that a college degree/coursework should qualify, but I have hired programmers from the local community college that clearly did not have the skills to program real world applications/devices. I would like to hear from others just what criteria (generally) should be necessary towards a valid programmers certification.
    :

    There is a certificate for Microsoft.

    http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcp/mcad/default.asp
    http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcp/mcsd/requirements.asp

  • : : : : I have programmed C/C++ for many years, but I have no certification.
    : : : : I found http://www.ncsacademy.com offering certification tests. I
    : : : : passed. They ask 24USD for a certificate after passing the test.
    : : : : You have an opinion about this website? It is real or fake?
    : : :
    : : : Let me guess, your results look like this?
    : : : [code=ffffff]
    : : : [b]Certification Exam Results[/b]
    : : :
    : : : Basic C++ Elements 4.0
    : : : Classes / Advanced Techniques 4.0
    : : : Code Comprehension / Debugging 4.0
    : : : [b]Total Score 4.0[/b]
    : : : [/code]Yeah, I just took the test. I timed myself: under 3 minutes, which is about 5 seconds per question, and that was taking my time.
    : : :
    : : : That "certificate" is worthless. If an employer followed up on the source of the certificate, they might even think less of you because you were so easily robbed of $25. ;)
    : : :
    : : : What a nice racket, though. Put up a tiny, low bandwidth website that [italic]charges[/italic] people for taking a 35 question survey, then just sit back and collect free money. Zero maintenance.
    : : :
    : : :
    : :
    : :
    : : It does bring up a point that I have often wondered about. Why isn't there some sort of valid certification for programmers like there is in other fields? Some would say that a college degree/coursework should qualify, but I have hired programmers from the local community college that clearly did not have the skills to program real world applications/devices. I would like to hear from others just what criteria (generally) should be necessary towards a valid programmers certification.
    : :
    :
    : There is a certificate for Microsoft.
    :
    : http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcp/mcad/default.asp
    : http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcp/mcsd/requirements.asp
    :
    :

    Thanks for the links, but I am referring more to certifications in specific ANSI standard languages rather than specific vendor products. There is an incredible volume of programming necessary, particularly in the embedded control world, that require programming outside of the Window environment. I wonder why design engineers have available to them licensing, yet software engineers do not.
  • :
    I wonder why design engineers have available to them licensing, yet software engineers do not.
    :


    [quote]
    Professional certification is now offered by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Computer Society. To be classified as a Certified Software Development Professional, individuals need a bachelors degree and work experience that demonstrates that they have mastered a relevant body of knowledge, and must pass a written exam.[/quote]

    http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos267.htm

  • It does bring up a point that I have often wondered about. Why isn't there some sort of valid certification for programmers like there is in other fields? Some would say that a college degree/coursework should qualify, but I have hired programmers from the local community college that clearly did not have the skills to program real world applications/devices. I would like to hear from others just what criteria (generally) should be necessary towards a valid programmers certification.

    [green]I think the reason there is no standard "programming degree program" is because most employers choose the tools that you use and the style that you program in. Allow me some leeway to explain my point.

    While ANSI/ISO certification is available to me that means he/she has a good understanding of a language at its base but just how many good clean applications can you write using conforming to ANSI? If that was a goal the project would take twice as long and be twice as big. A good understanding of the tools used in the work place (compilers, libraries, debuggers and the list goes on...) are what make us better programmers and the company you work for more profitable.

    People can look at code and say hey that's not portable programming but to that I say "so what". How many times (in the work place) have you been told to change a completed project? Not many I'm sure. Once a program is distributed (are they ever finished) your boss is not going to say "hey I want this code to be able to compile with a different compiler". You know why, he'd be fired. If a company moves in a different difection with the tools they use they hang on to old stuff just so they can still mantain an older program. They don't convert old stuff to new very often. That is why we look for people that have training, certification and experience using the tools we use to get the job done.

    Anyone that has come out of collage and into a skilled position will tell you that collage gives you a base to work from and more importantly the ability to learn and know how to research an answer. You learn job specific techniques and skills while your on the job. Not many come directly out of school with the skills to program real world applications/devices. The reason for that, real world applications for one company are completely useless to another.

    Truth be told, no school can tell you a person would fit in your organization and no piece of paper can tell me one programmer is better then another. If you have two hardware engineers with the same degree from the same school with the same grades those two people are not going to be equal in the job place. You can't always trust the pieces of paper held in the applicants hand. You have to feel them out, give them a little project or test, take them on a tour of the building, show them what he/she would be doing and then listen to the questions/comments they have. It's always a gut feeling type of thing.

    There are a lot of programmers out there that have tremendous skills using many different tools on many different platforms but in my opinion they end up being more of a prima donna then the good leader/example that I'd hoped for. The piece of paper (degree/certification) will guarantee (almost) that you get an interview but thats it. Thats the way it should be. No paper can or should give someone a job.

    Sorry for the rambling, I changed the topic somewhat so let me just sum up. Programming is unlike any other profession and that is one of the reasons it's hard to agree on a single certification that will carry it's weight though the entire industry. Programming revolves around creativeness, the ability to continually educate yourself and use of the tools provided by the work place. How many degrees do we hold in high regard that encompass these things?

    This is just my opinion, I could be wrong,[/green]
    [blue]JBaker[/blue]

  • [italic]"How many times (in the work place) have you been told to change a completed project?"[/italic]

    That's half my job. Obviously maintenance is not a big an issue in your particular domain, but it is in many others. Long term product support -- repairing bugs, adding features, even porting to new platforms, is a fact of life in many software projects and often represents the [italic]bulk[/italic] of a system's overall cost. It's a big deal.

    Knowing how to write portable code is a skill in it's own right. John Carmack develops his PC games on a Mac specifically so he can maintain his discipline at writing portable code.

    [italic]"Programming revolves around creativeness, the ability to continually educate yourself and use of the tools provided by the work place."[/italic]

    Absolutely.

  • "How many times (in the work place) have you been told to change a completed project? Not many I'm sure"

    That has been my full-time job for the past 6 years -- and I am only one of about 50 programmers on my project team. But I agree with you -- I could care less that my program won't compile with any other compiler let alone any other os. We don't need or even want our programs to be portable to other operating systems.

    However, I'm sure there are hundreds of other programmers and businesses that do care. GNU projects are a good example -- but even those programs are not 100% ANSI C/C++, and they can't be for good reasons (mainly hardware differences). It's just simply not possible to write a program or library of any significant size that is 100% ANSI C/C++.
  • [b][red]This message was edited by JBaker at 2004-10-14 14:34:41[/red][/b][hr]
    That's half my job. Obviously maintenance is not a big an issue in your particular domain, but it is in many others. Long term product support -- repairing bugs, adding features, even porting to new platforms, is a fact of life in many software projects and often represents the [italic]bulk[/italic] of a system's overall cost. It's a big deal.

    [green]I agree that maintenance, bug removal and adding features to existing software is a large part of a project as a whole. What was meant by that statement is that I've never been told that we must take this entire project and use it (as a whole) in a different programming environment. All software silently carries a life span or expiration date (unless it's turn-key or dedicated platform) that is determined by hardware manufacturers, companies that produce operating systems, and profitability of the product. If a product has not been very profitable for a company they obsolete it and start fresh. If a new operating system comes out software companies don't make there old stuff work with the new (they do patch work but not extensive re-modification) They produce a brand new product, force consumers to update and pay for it again, if they didn't we would still be using software written 10 years ago. I can't say it's true for everybody but there is no software used in our company that is more then 5 years old. Point being, it's been my experience that projects as a whole usually can live the entire life span in a single development environment. I agree that they reuse a lot of code but that code carries over to the new project because they are using the same development environment. Drivers, graphics engines, interfaces all have to be completely re-done from time to time.[/green]

    Knowing how to write portable code is a skill in it's own right. John Carmack develops his PC games on a Mac specifically so he can maintain his discipline at writing portable code.

    [green]Let me start by saying that I'm not judging you or telling you your wrong but making buggy whips was a skill too. The programming industry moves too fast to be concerned with portability issues. If my company tells me a project is to be done using M$ VC++ (version whatever) why would I keep a watchful eye on how portable the code is? Any good marketing department will give you your target customer information. Knowing what tools to use and what platforms I have to support is all we have to be concerned about. Why is it so important that the code be transparently usable with a different compiler or with an OS that we wont target? Bottom line(s), was it done on time and in budget, does it do everything we wanted it to do and are we making money on it. I just think (or is it I've been trained to think) portability issues are overrated concerns.

    Projects die, get new ideas and new tools that take advantage of the new "stuff" and start new projects. Let the old die in peace. All drivers, graphic engines and interfaces have to be rewritten every now and again because of things that are out of the programmers control. Is it nice to reuse a portion of the code because it's portable from one platform to another...yes. Is it vital, in my opinion, no.

    Final note on this subject, I don't think we can be so optimistic as to say a school degree or certification can produce a programmer of John Carmack's quality. He's as good as he is because he is who he is. ;-)

    Again it's only my opinion,[/green]
    [blue]JBaker[/blue]

    [green]On another tangent, I don't think that your John Carmack statement is correct. I think the story is that the Quake source code was stolen and circulated. Because of that a hacker by the name GAlexander used it to port Quake to other platforms, and sent the patches to him. I'm not 100% on that but thats what I remember being said.[/green]



  • [b][red]This message was edited by Eric Tetz at 2004-10-14 22:49:18[/red][/b][hr]
    [italic]"I've never been told that we must take this entire project and use it (as a whole) in a different programming environment."[/italic]

    I've been part of numerous projects that began by moving a large code base to a radically different platform (PC to Playstation, Dreamcast to PS2, etc.) Sometimes the same game will change platforms mid-way through development (very common during the transition from one console generation to the next).

    [italic]"If a new operating system comes out software companies don't make there old stuff work with the new (they do patch work but not extensive re-modification). They produce a brand new product, force consumers to update and pay for it again..."[/italic]

    Who is "they"? What companies start over from scratch when bringing their product to a new platform? Cross platform products are [italic]very[/italic] common these days, especially in the gaming industry (my previous industry). You don't rewrite an entire game from scratch every time you need to support a new platform.

    My current project is a $100,000 device powered by hundreds of thousands of lines of code. Each new release of the software (we're currently on version 4.2) has added dozens of new, complicated features that required thousands of man hours of testing to ensure their robustness.

    We're currently working on the next generation of the product, based on a much more powerful hardware platform -- different architecture, different OS, different tools. Did we toss all our code and start over from scratch? Um, no. That code is our [italic]product[/italic], it cost tens of millions of dollars to develop.

    [italic]"we would still be using software written 10 years ago"[/italic]

    We are! Legacy code is everywhere. I guarantee you that somewhere along the line there's 20 year old code helping to ferrying these characters from my machine to yours.

    [italic]Let me start by saying that I'm not judging you or telling you your wrong but making buggy whips was a skill too. The programming industry moves too fast to be concerned with portability issues.[/italic]

    LOL! Maybe [italic]your[/italic] specific industry doesn't care about portability, but that doesn't mean the programming industry overall does not.

    I'm not saying that [italic]all[/italic] projects place a premium on portable code -- that would be as bogus a generalization as the one you're making. It's very important in certain domains, and it's an important skill for any programmer. It means you know the line between what the language guarantees and what happens to work on a particular compiler. If you don't know that line you can end up with code that's not even "portable" between version 1.0 and 1.1 of the same compiler.

    [italic]"If my company tells me a project is to be done using M$ VC++ (version whatever) why would I keep a watchful eye on how portable the code is?"[/italic]

    I can't answer that question because I know nothing about your company. There are lots of commercial Windows projects that are tightly wed to a particular compiler, it's probably the norm, but there is much more to the 'programming industry' that the Windows desktop.

    Hell, even if you [i]are[/i] a Windows-only shop, whose to say that two years down the road marketing won't demand a Mac version? I've seen that kinda stuff happen. I've seen porting efforts end in disaster because of lazy programming practices.

    [italic]On another tangent, I don't think that your John Carmack statement is correct. I think the story is that the Quake source code was stolen and circulated. Because of that a hacker by the name GAlexander used it to port Quake to other platforms, and sent the patches to him. I'm not 100% on that but thats what I remember being said.[/italic]

    Quake? Welcome to 1996. ;) Carmack's been developing on/for Mac and Linux for many, many years. Doom III was developed on a Mac and first publicly demoed on a Mac. He says it helps him maintain discipline at writing portable code.





  • I thank you for answers and saving money.
  • : It does bring up a point that I have often wondered about. Why isn't there some sort of valid certification for programmers like there is in other fields? Some would say that a college degree/coursework should qualify, but I have hired programmers from the local community college that clearly did not have the skills to program real world applications/devices. I would like to hear from others just what criteria (generally) should be necessary towards a valid programmers certification.
    :
    : [green]I think the reason there is no standard "programming degree program" is because most employers choose the tools that you use and the style that you program in. Allow me some leeway to explain my point.
    :
    : While ANSI/ISO certification is available to me that means he/she has a good understanding of a language at its base but just how many good clean applications can you write using conforming to ANSI? If that was a goal the project would take twice as long and be twice as big. A good understanding of the tools used in the work place (compilers, libraries, debuggers and the list goes on...) are what make us better programmers and the company you work for more profitable.
    :
    : People can look at code and say hey that's not portable programming but to that I say "so what". How many times (in the work place) have you been told to change a completed project? Not many I'm sure. Once a program is distributed (are they ever finished) your boss is not going to say "hey I want this code to be able to compile with a different compiler". You know why, he'd be fired. If a company moves in a different difection with the tools they use they hang on to old stuff just so they can still mantain an older program. They don't convert old stuff to new very often. That is why we look for people that have training, certification and experience using the tools we use to get the job done.
    :
    : Anyone that has come out of collage and into a skilled position will tell you that collage gives you a base to work from and more importantly the ability to learn and know how to research an answer. You learn job specific techniques and skills while your on the job. Not many come directly out of school with the skills to program real world applications/devices. The reason for that, real world applications for one company are completely useless to another.
    :
    : Truth be told, no school can tell you a person would fit in your organization and no piece of paper can tell me one programmer is better then another. If you have two hardware engineers with the same degree from the same school with the same grades those two people are not going to be equal in the job place. You can't always trust the pieces of paper held in the applicants hand. You have to feel them out, give them a little project or test, take them on a tour of the building, show them what he/she would be doing and then listen to the questions/comments they have. It's always a gut feeling type of thing.
    :
    : There are a lot of programmers out there that have tremendous skills using many different tools on many different platforms but in my opinion they end up being more of a prima donna then the good leader/example that I'd hoped for. The piece of paper (degree/certification) will guarantee (almost) that you get an interview but thats it. Thats the way it should be. No paper can or should give someone a job.
    :
    : Sorry for the rambling, I changed the topic somewhat so let me just sum up. Programming is unlike any other profession and that is one of the reasons it's hard to agree on a single certification that will carry it's weight though the entire industry. Programming revolves around creativeness, the ability to continually educate yourself and use of the tools provided by the work place. How many degrees do we hold in high regard that encompass these things?
    :
    : This is just my opinion, I could be wrong,[/green]
    : [blue]JBaker[/blue]
    :
    :

    There are obviously many different disciplines involved when we speak of professional programmers. Windows programmers clearly need a different approach in their profession than people do in my industry which is embedded control systems. Code that I am modifying this week is code that I originally wrote a decade ago, and that is currently being used in robotic machinery across North America. It is in a continual state of refinement, which is typical of all the control systems that I have designed for my company.

    For me, portable code is not so important as readable code is, but I would suggest that portability and readability compliment each other. Perhaps you are right concerning "licensed" programmers. Most proficient Windows programmers would not readily know how to approach control system design, just as I am clueless about Windows and Mac systems.

    Still, my ego might grow a little with a license...
  • [green]Wow, I didn't mean to turn this into a pissing match. I think what I've been writing was clearly talking about my experiences. And I quote...

    [italic]"Allow me some leeway to explain my point."[/italic]

    and at the end of each post something along the lines of...

    [italic]"This is just my opinion"[/italic]

    My apologies for using generalization when it comes to this industry but again I was asking for leeway and let everyone know that it was just my opinion. It's only too obvious that each job is different so [b]thank you for helping me prove my original point that no one piece of paper (degree/certification) can carry the same weight for each employer.[/b][/green]

    [italic]"Who is 'they'"[/italic]

    [green]I'm sorry you didn't understand the context of that paragraph. I've read it twice and both times I would say "they" refers to programmers/software companies. Again a slight generalization can be drawn from that comment so again I must point out the obvious that no one person can speak for the entire industry.[/green]

    [italic]"What companies start over from scratch when bringing their product to a new platform?"[/italic]

    [green]We do. We produce embeded, turn-key and PC platform software. Most of the products we sell have PC interfaces so when the PC consumers moved from DOS to the WIN 9X generation, and again when they (consumers) stated purchasing PC's with Win2000/XP, we would have had to rewrite major portion of the code. Because so much had to be redone we just started from scratch. And I do prefer to write my own stuff instead of working with code others wrote before me. Admittedly, our code rarely gets to 100's of 1000's lines and our custom libraries are small in size as well so starting from scratch is usually accepted here as a breath of fresh air where new ideas are tested.[/green]

    [italic]"My current project is a $100,000 device powered by hundreds of thousands of lines of code. Each new release of the software (we're currently on version 4.2) has added dozens of new, complicated features that required thousands of man hours of testing to ensure their robustness."[/italic]

    [green]Hundreds of thousands of lines of code is quite a bit. Wouldnt something like MFC had made it much smaller and more manageable or is it turn-key, dedicated platform, If so then I refer you to an early statement...

    [italic]"...unless it's turn-key or dedicated platform..."[/italic]

    I do give exception to that portion of the industry because we have embedded programmers here as well as turn-key products so [b]from my own experiences[/b] I can say the embedded portion of [b]our company[/b] is much more stable and turn-key products are rarely changed [b]in the portion of industry I work in[/b]. [/green]

    [italic]"We're currently working on the next generation of the product, based on a much more powerful hardware platform -- different architecture, different OS, different tools. Did we toss all our code and start over from scratch? Um, no. That code is our product, it cost tens of millions of dollars to develop."[/italic]

    [green]Wow, thats a lot of money. The company I work for has never had to spend 10's of millions on software development. If I worked for your company I wouldnt worry about this new project to much. It should be done quickly and cheap because your company writes portable software right? [/green]

    [italic]"We are! Legacy code is everywhere. I guarantee you that somewhere along the line there's 20 year old code helping to ferrying these characters from my machine to yours."[/italic]

    [green]I'm sure there are many applications that do reuse portions of older code. I'm not saying the wheel has to be reinvented every time a product is released. If there is a portable way to do something that has no benefits over using compiler specific functions/data types/exc... then of course it would be better. However I have seen on this board, more then a few times, programming for portability just can't get it done effectively and efficiently in many cases.[/green]

    [italic]"LOL! Maybe your specific industry doesn't care about portability, but that doesn't mean the programming industry overall does not.[/italic]

    [green]Again, let me state that I can only speak from my experiences. Admittedly when re-reading my posts I think I used "we" and "us" to many times but I really can't see how one might become confused with the fact that I [b]always[/b] try to point out that I'm speaking from my experiences only. However I do tend to use "we" and "us" many times while posting. I'll try to keep a handle on that so it doesn't sound like I was speaking for the entire industry. I didn't think that would have been an assumption drawn by the posters here. I assure you I am not that nave nor am I some code guru above all others able to speak for us all in every portion of the industry. I think thats fairly obvious too, just look at some of the questions I ask here. If others have drawn this conclusion that I offer my apologies and will watch my grammar more closely.[/green]

    [italic]"I'm not saying that all projects place a premium on portable code -- that would be as bogus a generalization as the one you're making."[/italic]

    [green]Ouch Eric, play nice and don't assume the worst in people. It's not very becoming. I refer you to my response just above this one.[/green]

    [italic]"It's very important in certain domains, and it's an important skill for any programmer. It means you know the line between what the language guarantees and what happens to work on a particular compiler. If you don't know that line you can end up with code that's not even "portable" between version 1.0 and 1.1 of the same compiler."[/italic]

    [green]Again I must refer back to a portion of an earlier post in this thread that you must have missed.

    [italic]"Is it nice to reuse a portion of the code because it's portable from one platform to another...yes. Is it vital,[b] in my opinion[/b], no."[/italic][/green]

    [italic]"Hell, even if you are a Windows-only shop, whose to say that two years down the road marketing won't demand a Mac version? I've seen that kinda stuff happen. I've seen porting efforts end in disaster because of lazy programming practices."[/italic]

    [green]No, were not a Windows-only shop. And your right, "who is to say..." This (meaning mine [b]not everybodys[/b]) industry moves so fast we could all be using something completely different soon. Didn't I say that earlier...humm...must just be me.[/green]

    [italic]"Quake? Welcome to 1996. ;) Carmack's been developing on/for Mac and Linux for many, many years. Doom III was developed on a Mac and first publicly demoed on a Mac. He says it helps him maintain discipline at writing portable code."[/italic]

    [gray][italic]"While Activision's statement only mentions in passing that Doom III is a PC game and doesn't specify system requirements, it's possible that the PC and console-centric Activision may license a Mac publisher to port the Mac version of Doom III itself. Activision did exactly that with Return to Castle Wolfenstein, published for the Mac only a couple of weeks ago by Aspyr Media."[/italic][b]MacCentral - May 03, 2002[/b][/gray]

    [green]I humbly withdraw from this thread,[/green]
    [blue]JBaker[/blue]

  • [italic]"This is just my opinion"[/italic]

    http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=opinion
    [code=ffffff]
    [b]o-pin-ion[/b] [italic]n.[/italic]
    1. A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not
    substantated by positive knowledge or proof.[/code]So how does your saying "just my opinion" preclude me from pointing out that it's wrong?

    [italic]"I must point out the obvious that no one person can speak for the entire industry."[/italic]

    Which is exactly what I said that seems to have offended you so.

    [italic]"Hundreds of thousands of lines of code is quite a bit. Wouldnt something like MFC had made it much smaller and more manageable or is it turn-key, dedicated platform, If so then I refer you to an early statement..."[/italic]

    MFC? Again, it seems that you equate "programming industry" with "Windows desktop development".

    [italic]"Wow, thats a lot of money. The company I work for has never had to spend 10's of millions on software development."[/italic]

    It's a difference in scale. When a project requires years of coordination between 50+ programmers and 100+ devetest engineers all over the planet, you don't slop together crap code with no consideration of portability. Code quality is paramount.

    [italic]"I really can't see how one might become confused with the fact that I always try to point out that I'm speaking from my experiences only."[/italic]

    Nobody was confused, it was quite obvious that you were speaking from your personal experiences only. I was just pointing out that your personal experiences don't reflect the the entire programming industry.

    [italic]"I'll try to keep a handle on that so it doesn't sound like I was speaking for the entire industry. I didn't think that would have been an assumption drawn by the posters here."[/italic]

    It wasn't a spurious assumption, it's what you [italic]said[/italic]. You talked about (and I quote) "all software", with statements like "[italic]software companies[/italic] don't make there old stuff work with the new" and "[italic]the programming industry[/italic] moves too fast to be concerned with portability issues." You didn't say "my company" or "my team" you said "the programming industry".

    [italic]"Is it nice to reuse a portion of the code because it's portable from one platform to another...yes. Is it vital, in my opinion, no."[/italic]

    In some industries it [italic]is[/italic] vital.

    [italic]"This (meaning mine not everybodys) industry moves so fast we could all be using something completely different soon. Didn't I say that earlier...humm...must just be me."[/italic]

    Yup, just you.

    [italic]"Activision's statement only mentions in passing that Doom III is a PC game..." MacCentral - May 03, 2002[/italic]

    Carmack demoed Doom III at Macworld Expo in 2001 (http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/doom3/news_2689668.html), a year before that totally irrelevant quote you managed to google up, but he's been working on both Macs and PCs since Quake 2.

    "So, I got a mac and started developing on it. [...] I still need to do some platform specific things with odd configurations like multi monitor and addon controlers, but basically now its just a matter of compiling on the mac to bring it up to date. This was important to me, because I felt that Quake2 had slipped a bit in portability because it had been natively developed on windows. I like the discipline of simultanious portable development."
    -- John Carmack, 1/10/1999

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories