Super coder I wishing you cancer.
You’re son of a b*tch.
Please go to hell and then don’t go
back.Yes?
HeHeHeHe 
Umm thte thing is Marcus, is that Nehe states at the top of all his tutorial pages that alot of the code he learned from the MSDN library. So he did give credit were it was due. No offence intented I just wanted to clear that up.
Howdy,
I’ve never read NeHe’s tutorials, but the code fragment provided on the previous page is hardly plagerism =)
I wouldn’t see a problem if NeHe ~didn’t~ acknowledge MSDN. Its one thing to cut and paste ~algorithms~ and say that they’re your own, but I don’t see anything wrong with cutting and pasting a single procedure call with arguments and comments already in there. Its just saving on grunt work, not cheating on thinking.
Someone once said that there has been only one Makefile ever written… and all other Makefiles are descendants of that.
cheers,
John
My appologies - I totally missed the MSDN acknowledgement on NeHe’s page
I wouldn’t see a problem if NeHe ~didn’t~ acknowledge MSDN. Its one thing to cut and paste ~algorithms~ and say that they’re your own, but I don’t see anything wrong with cutting and pasting a single procedure call with arguments and comments already in there. Its just saving on grunt work, not cheating on thinking.
Hmm… Don’t agree totally. In that case I wouldn’t have to credit NeHe either, since all his base-code does is calling standard operating system calls with a few standard parameters. In my opinion, it’s often a h*ll lot worse understanding OS-specific stuff than understanding and writing an algorithm.
Someone once said that there has been only one Makefile ever written… and all other Makefiles are descendants of that.
That may be the truth! I, for one, learned the Makefile syntax from other makefiles…
But as soon as you start talking about more than ONE procefure call, then you’re talking algorithm, and that’s not what I mean.
Suppose you wanted to spell antidisestablishmentarinism. Well, not that I know how to spell it, but suppose THAT is the correct spelling. Now, suppose you wanted to write a sentence with this spelling, and you write:
“I do not know how to spell <BFW>”. Now, the sentence is entirely your own creation, but you NEED to know the correct spelling of the Big Freaking Word… so, you go and paste the word from the dictionary. Can you be accused of plagerism? I’d argue that you cannot because you’re copying the syntax, not the semantics. If I was to cut and paste someone’s sentence, which encapsulates semantics—ie. someone’s idea—then I’d say this was working on becoming plagerism because its someone’s IDEA, not someone’s SYNTAX.
i’m talking about the only example that has been shown in the discussion forums, ie.
goatFarm(5, // number of goats 4, // number of legs per goat 8, // number of pens 2); // number of times a day to feed the animals
cut and pasting the comments explaining the parameters wouldn’t REALLY need to be referenced, I’d argue. Building complex semantics with different procedure calls would.
Each to his own, tho’.
cheers,
Hohn
Besides, The code of pixel format is standard for all standard OpenGL calls. He didn’t invent the pixelformat part instead was just calling the function.
Fastian
Get a grip kids.
we’re debating a point, not having a childish argument
/Yawn/. Exactly what I thought after reading the comments on ths thread! tic