On 13 jan, 10:16, Oliver Seitz <[email protected]> wrote: >People want to have the libs in JAL, readable and working. I can live with >that at least so far that I don't have to start my own, "better" jallib >project.
Okay. But maybe the optimized algorithms that does not use multiplications nor divisions may be coded in JAL? >And I don't try to tell a lot of people that I take benefit from their work >but they did a bad job. The libs are working, and in most cases they do their >work "good enough". If one doesn't, I'll improve the lib or put an optimized >replacement in the program that needs that. It was not my intent. I was just trying to answer to some comments I saw here about the size and speed of some libraries, for small devices in particular. Well: "good enough" is a very subjective concept. Everybody has his own opinion... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en.
