1. Home
  2. Embedded Programming
  3. OLinuXino, a serious Rasberry Pi competitor?
  4. Page 6

OLinuXino, a serious Rasberry Pi competitor?

On a sunny day (Thu, 15 Mar 2012 09:00:52 GMT) it happened snipped-for-privacy@puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) wrote in :

That depends on the type of TFT monitor. And actually also on the type of screen. And there is the start of it all, 'that 'controller' you talk about. Still the X server frame refresh is not normally locked to the frame change, only, as I pointed out if special measures are taken. On top of that, if you have a LCD teevee with VGA input then

50 Hz is NOT a VGA standard, adding even more problems. So then there are the guys running a 60 Hz display, probably most of the peesees, and feeding that with HDMI into the latest LCD TV, and then play a 50 Hz movie on it. I have tried all that to see what happens, and it is shit. I had, as referring to 'controller' a litte few inch 12 V composite in monitor. It did 50 Hz no problem, as it would just PAL decode and refresh the LCD at that rate, Those TFTs are simple analog in RGB and you can control the scanning. Nothing was 'converted'. The big LCD TVs and monitors do indeed conversion, are basically a frame store, but even those have to flip in a new frame in sync, else you get a tared picture, It is amazing how little people really know about video these days, And then do not even get me started on interlace.
Reply to
Jan Panteltje
Loading thread data ...

...and even if you DO match the frame rates you are still watching a film originally shot at 24 Hz. Do you ever notice how films on TV are "really shit"? No: that shows how silly the argument is. There's sufficient latency in the eye's response that at these kinds of frame rates a slightly inconsistent frame rate is a complete non-issue. You can always imagine problems if you want, but the average user doesn't care because it isn't a problem that exists in any real-world sense.

--
Andrew Smallshaw
andrews@sdf.lonestar.org
Reply to
Andrew Smallshaw

On a sunny day (15 Mar 2012 05:07:28 GMT) it happened Jasen Betts wrote in :

No I was referring to C++ Cannot stand it. It is a crime against humanity.

Reply to
Jan Panteltje

Spoken like someone unwilling to learn something new. C++ actually offers a lot to avoid common mistakes made in C. When used right you can create more robust programs and cut down on time wasted on debugging.

--
Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply
indicates you are not using the right tools...
nico@nctdevpuntnl (punt=.)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to
Nico Coesel

who

:)

I must agree. That blazing idiot Strousup thought that smalltalk like objects really could be smoothly bolted onto C. Thirty years later it is finally becoming apparent to even him that it wasn't the best idea.

?-)

Reply to
josephkk

those who

assembler :)

So does Pascal, Object Pascal, Ada, Perl, Python and many other = languages. And guess what, none of them have the same mind bending inconsistencies that C++ endured for so many years.

?-)

Reply to
josephkk

And enables you to make a whole lot new ones instead.

Yeah. That's the hard part.

Vinzent.

--
The most likely way for the world to be destroyed, most experts agree,
is by accident. That's where we come in; we're computer professionals.
We cause accidents.
     -- Nathaniel Borenstein
Reply to
Vinzent Hoefler

On a sunny day (Fri, 16 Mar 2012 22:07:38 GMT) it happened snipped-for-privacy@puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) wrote in :

mm, 'when used right' you can dig your grave with a thoothpic too. LOL

Reply to
Jan Panteltje

On a sunny day (Sat, 17 Mar 2012 06:06:41 +0100) it happened "Vinzent Hoefler" wrote in :

Right C++ was invented by Stroussup because he could not program. He did not want to really learn how to program in C, so he invented his own kludges so it looked like he could. That hit big time with all the other ones who could not program either.

It is a normal thing, human nature, people do not know how to do something,. and then do not want to learn, so they make their own solutions. that is why so see a new programming language every year, and the creators of those shouting from the treetops that it makes everything so simple that any clueless idiot can use it. Now you have 2 problems, clueless idiots using languages written by clueless idiots. Stroussup should be in that jail on Cuba, His ideas created more bloat than you can imagine, but OK, C++ compiler writers benefit [1], so do hardware vendors, so it has its supporter, even beyond those who never learned to program in C.

[1] They never seemed to agree on the correct interpretation of that language [2] though,. [2] Speech disability, [3] hates PICs too, his PIC projects did not work.
Reply to
Jan Panteltje

Hey, if you think object bolting in C++ is bad, check out Matlab some time -- amazing they managed to pull it off at all. :-)

Pragmatically speaking, C++ is pretty good -- it offered a lot of the power of "pure" OO languages such as Smalltalk or LISP, and as history has shown, none of those languages have ever been hugely successful commercially... whereas C++ very much has been. I.e., the choice wasn't ever C++ or Smalltalk, it was C++ or C.

I am a little surprised that Apple decided to make Objective C the primary programming language of iThings ... I suppose that's what you end up with if you don't like C++ that much but don't want to suck all the performance out of your app using something like LISP.

Reply to
Joel Koltner

is

=20

LISP isn't really object oriented. It is actually something even more different.

?-)

Reply to
josephkk

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.