3 ms·
You seem to be contradicting yourself. If the binary size is big because of the (lack of) tools the author knows, the alternative to this is an editor made by
by tomtomtom777 10y ago
You seem to be contradicting yourself.
If the binary size is big because of the (lack of) tools the author knows, the alternative to this is an editor made by someone who knows tools that don't bloat the binary.
- croon 10y agoHe's not. This exists because the tools existed to enable the author to make this in a reasonable timeframe/effort. If something better/smaller exists, use it. If it doesn't exist, it might be because making it smaller requires tools that take more effort/time to use and thus no one has bothered. I've traditionally liked crapping on bloated software too, but have come to realize that the plethora of software is fine and I can use whatever I like and abstain from what I dislike. The simple fact is that the alternative to bloated software is a subtraction of that software. And sometimes they happen to be useful, despite their size.
- muthdra 10y agoThanks for sharing this point of view, man.
- tomtomtom777 10y agoI am not really crapping on bloat. I am merely correcting the point that the only alternative is no editor at all.
- croon 10y agoOn your first point; alright, then my mistake. But my comment was really in response to your second line here. I disagreed with your assertion. The alternative is that this editor doesn't exist, meaning "no editor at all" with this specific featureset/design/etc. And if this editor is better than a less bloated editor, why shouldn't it exist?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]