dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase") wrote:
i think part of the intent was to force me to understand it properly. to effectively port it to a different instruction set is a much more engaging task than translating c++ to c.
dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase") wrote:
i think part of the intent was to force me to understand it properly. to effectively port it to a different instruction set is a much more engaging task than translating c++ to c.