bsnes v0.039 released

[wertigon]

You're confusing me. 0.04 is the same thing as 0.040. One is showing thousandths, the other isn't. It's mathematically compatible with old versions to drop it. Yet another reason decimal systems suck, people can't even understand this. They never get followed, either. For some reason, people like trying to proportion progress and make integer jumps rare and radiant events to usher in big new changes.

See, math has nothing to do with version numbers. It *Isn't* a decimal number. It's two separate numbers separated by a dot. So, the ammount of zeroes before a number is, in fact, irrelevant *unless* we're speaking decimals, which we aren't in this case.

Of course, YMMV, but that's how I and many others interpret it. Among other things, there's Gnome v2.2 and Gnome v2.20 - Two different versions. 2.2 was preceded by 2.0 and succeeded by 2.4, 2.20 was preceded by 2.18 and succeeded by 2.22.

Hope that cleared it up some.

Seriously, people could just redist the code patches, not the binaries. Or is that non allowed to?

Not allowed without approval.

Actually, yes that *would* be allowed, if you only distribute the code you yourself wrote, and instructions on how to patch the code to bsnes, or maybe even a shell script which automates this process. They're only distributing their own code, which is under their copyright. So technicly it's completely legal for them to do that.

However it is a cumbersome process so you don't want to do it unless neccessary...

[odditude]

Using window scales in fullscreen mode is an oxymoron. There aren't plenty of reasons to leave them in, which is why you didn't state them.

i'm guessing you don't have a widescreen monitor/tv. also, like byuu mentioned, scanlines go to shit if you're not at an integer-multiple vertical res.

playing snes games at 1360x768, stretched to hell with bizarre horizontal bands from scanlines, is far from ideal.

[FitzRoy]

I like my numbering system. How many major, non-bugfix versions of bsnes have there been? Okay, how many versions of Ubuntu have there been? How about ZSNES? Linux kernel? Right.

I will make it to 100 releases, and I don't want to exceed v1.0. I consider v1.0 to be special ... either a final release, or perfect emulation. We don't want the former, and we can't have the latter. I know you guys don't mind if we get up to version 13.67, but I do.

On one hand, I get it. On the other, you're basically admitting there is no such thing as a v1.0. Even if 100% of the system was perfectly emulated, the code would still undergo maintenance changes to stay functional with the latest operating systems. Guess I'll suck it up and keep typing zeroes and decimals until the end of time, though.

Along the same lines, I also think that menu hiding should become standard fullscreen behavior instead of a hotkey for both modes.

Yeah, that's fine. I still want to allow turning them on via escape. There's nothing stopping you from using the cheat editor / filter change setting when in fullscreen, for instance.

This was sort of a total package thing. You can't get rid of the fullscreen menu if you have to be in fullscreen mode to change fullscreen mode settings. This is one of the consequences of not having them in configuration. Turning on cheat, changing a config setting, running the debugger, watching the fps just doesn't make sense to use while in fullscreen. It would be a pain in the ass due to the lack of a taskbar to minimize these managers to. You'd have to toggle out or reopen them from the menu every time you wanted to switch between gameplay and dicking with them. Unhiding the menu is essentially the same thing as toggling the mode. They both take one keystroke, both give menu access, and they both make the display area non-exclusive. Fullscreen should stop trying to act like a maximized version of windowed, its purpose is to rid the screen of everything but the display area. The menu/statusbar should always show in windowed and always hide in fullscreen with no funny options to make it otherwise.

As for the perfect height scaling, it's a choice between a larger image and a slightly worse filtered image. I personally can't notice what you're talking about, any one of those filters makes the dupe line effect impossible for me to see. If you really couldn't live with universal settings, my idea could still be modified to have a radio box selector for separate windowed and fullscreen settings.

I also really like having menubar access to these settings. Not mnemonic keyboard bindings, not "go into the video panel" settings. Quick, easy, simple menubar access for resizing.

Then why have anything in there? Video is no different from anything else. You use what you use in windowed, you use what you use in fullscreen. It's just like input and audio, you set your preferences and use them, you don't change them every five minutes. There's no need for quickness.

And what about people like me who want a 4:3 correction and not that pinpoint tv stuff that stretches the same artwork differently on PAL/NTSC? A selection box like I made with 2 or 4 settings would look a hell of a lot better than trying to add menu entries or advanced mode settings like before.

Really wish you were a programmer :P
I'd be happy to let you maintain the public UI, and I could do my own thing for my needs. I admit my needs may not match general needs all that well, but I'm the one developing it so ... :P

Does HTML count? :P

[byuu]

Not square (square on top, video capture on bottom). Same size as NES/SNES pixels, BTW.

Man, major color bleeding. I would've guessed they were going for multi-color text.

Is this actually a problem? The only time I ran into this on Windows using Direct3D was when I tried to make a Present() call -after- the first possible instance of GetRasterStatus saying VBlank had started.

That's how it has to be done in windowed mode. No backflipping with GDI elements like the menubar, and I don't have an exclusive mode anyway.

Also to support Xv et al, I can't cheat and start rendering after the last visible line but before vsync. I sacrifice quite a bit for the cross platform approach, partly why I'm so happy about Qt. OpenGL on Linux is also a lot worse than Direct3D on Windows at tearing.

Actually, yes that *would* be allowed, if you only distribute the code you yourself wrote, and instructions on how to patch the code to bsnes, or maybe even a shell script which automates this process. They're only distributing their own code, which is under their copyright. So technicly it's completely legal for them to do that.

That's true with the GPL, definitely. My license though is not a distribution license. You accept it to download it, you accept it to look at the code, you accept it to use the software. The second someone distributes his patch, he's violating my license.

Whether that holds up in court doesn't really matter, though. It's freeware and I'm poor. Not going to be suing anyone, unless a major corp tries selling it commercially (hi, Jaleco / Hudson.)

It's just like input and audio, you set your preferences and use them, you don't change them every five minutes.

Actually, I do change the size stuff constantly. But yeah, I'm not the typical user.

And what about people like me who want a 4:3 correction and not that pinpoint tv stuff that stretches the same artwork differently on PAL/NTSC?

We can put a dropdown / dual-spinbox on the video panel to control ARC.

Does HTML count? :P

Not until Qt seriously revamps its UI support to dynamically generate interfaces from HTML, and even link up signal / slots. Would be really cool.

[tetsuo55]

Bsnes would have to be capable of moving the sync line into the black part of the screen ofcourse for it to be fully usable

Are you saying you have trouble with this in bsnes when using the highest scale setting your monitor can do? Because it could (at least for certain drivers) call Present as soon as the beam reaches the, er, lower black bar. Tracking the beam for the upper black bar is pointless as VBlank happens before then anyway and you'll always be too late if you present after VBlank; the delay is simply too big.

It would be nice if you could keep track of the size of the delay between calling Present and the front buffer actually being updated. Then you could tell it to start drawing at the optimal time, which would avoid the odd duplicate frame. You'd still have to be careful not to start drawing too soon or too late, especially if you might do -either-, as tearing from that would presumably be twice as noticeable.

The only way I can think of to do this would be to encode a time stamp in the back buffer, then poll the front buffer until its time stamp is updated. But that would leave a visual artifact in the frame, not to mention the cost of polling, and might not be feasible if the time spent getting access to the front buffer's data is significant. (i.e. latency in communicating with the graphics card.. unless it's possible to make the GPU go through the process all on its own, i.e. via CUDA) It might be an interesting experiment though.

When the image refresh rate and the physical refresh rate do not match images can be drawn anywhere on screen(tearing location) some application allow movement of this spot with a vsync offset, moving it far enough pushes it into the black part of the screen effectively removing the tearing

[wertigon]

Actually, yes that *would* be allowed, if you only distribute the code you yourself wrote, and instructions on how to patch the code to bsnes, or maybe even a shell script which automates this process. They're only distributing their own code, which is under their copyright. So technicly it's completely legal for them to do that.

That's true with the GPL, definitely. My license though is not a distribution license. You accept it to download it, you accept it to look at the code, you accept it to use the software. The second someone distributes his patch, he's violating my license.

Whether that holds up in court doesn't really matter, though. It's freeware and I'm poor. Not going to be suing anyone, unless a major corp tries selling it commercially (hi, Jaleco / Hudson.)

Actually... I think you're right. I were a bit confused about this line in the bsnes license:

[...] The reproduction of modified or derivative works of the software is strictly prohibited, except when transmitted solely to the licensor.

A modified work would be counted as redistributing your entire codebase, which would clearly not be the case here. So how about derivative works? Well, according to Wikipedia, a derivative work is defined as:

In copyright law, a derivative work is an expressive creation that includes major, copyright-protected elements of an original, previously created first work.

But, a bit further down, I can read (emphasis mine):

A “derivative work” is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a “derivative work”.

Since the patch is based upon previous work, it makes it a derivative work despite no having any parts of the original in it. That more or less kills my assumption that all derivatives have a bit of the original in it, as well. I'm not a lawyer though, so I might've interpreted it wrong.

[creaothceann]

Does HTML count?

No, unless you mean a web development language... or this.

[FirebrandX]

Looks like it is the right moment to ask about video mode scales.

Is it any real needs in scales for fullscreen? Is'nt the fullscreen are virtually always supposed to fill up the entire screen space except menu\debug\out-of-ratio bars?

Some people might want to play in doublescale on fullscreen or perhaps some other scale besides max. There are plenty of reasons to leave them in, while there is only one reason to leave them out.

Actually, willow is right. Using window scales in fullscreen mode is an oxymoron. There aren't plenty of reasons to leave them in, which is why you didn't state them. I think the behavior should change to max scale at all times. This was actually part of my proposal to overhaul the video settings, I was intending to choose a more dormant time, but I want to defend willow's logic. I'd like to see them moved back into the configuration area and have settings be universal for both modes, excepting scale of course.

Actually willow is wrong. If you actually got your way and byuu made bsnes max on fullscreen, I'd stop using the emulator except for versions before the change. I have a widescreen display, AND I like to use scanlines. A maxed emulator image looks like absolute crap on a widescreen LCD, especially if you use scanlines. I'm a non-stretched purist on all the emulators I use. If the image isn't scaled in multiples, I don't want to see it.

[_willow_]

Looks like it is the right moment to ask about video mode scales.

Is it any real needs in scales for fullscreen? Is'nt the fullscreen are virtually always supposed to fill up the entire screen space except menu\debug\out-of-ratio bars?

Some people might want to play in doublescale on fullscreen or perhaps some other scale besides max. There are plenty of reasons to leave them in, while there is only one reason to leave them out.

Actually, willow is right. Using window scales in fullscreen mode is an oxymoron. There aren't plenty of reasons to leave them in, which is why you didn't state them. I think the behavior should change to max scale at all times. This was actually part of my proposal to overhaul the video settings, I was intending to choose a more dormant time, but I want to defend willow's logic. I'd like to see them moved back into the configuration area and have settings be universal for both modes, excepting scale of course.

Actually willow is wrong. If you actually got your way and byuu made bsnes max on fullscreen, I'd stop using the emulator except for versions before the change. I have a widescreen display, AND I like to use scanlines. A maxed emulator image looks like absolute crap on a widescreen LCD, especially if you use scanlines. I'm a non-stretched purist on all the emulators I use. If the image isn't scaled in multiples, I don't want to see it.

widescreen?
You have the widescreen so what? Is'nt your widescreen can't possible show the full-screen image? Having just the black bars left and right, no? Seems i do not understand the beauty of the tiny image inside the gracefull black void. And i do not understand what the fullscreen term means too.

Scanlines?
Sorry but it is NOT scanlines. It is just "even lines fades by some% effect". It can't be compared to PAL\NTSC scanlines. True scanlines wouldn't look any uglier with non integer scale. It's just "black lines mask" that's all. Sort of moire. Yes, this mask do not work right with non integer scale. IMO it's the filter job to define the maximum scales allowed.

non-stretched purist?
How about integer scales, looks like it's not stretching for you, right? If it's not stretching at all then the LCD technology is an

absolute crap

You simply defending your own tastes by the cost of sense and terminology. Even if you can't hook up the tube to PC it doesn't shift the meanings of the words. I do not deny anyones favourites i just want more rational explanation then "c**p", "s**t", etc.

so far only byuu stressed on vblank thing and i do not agree with his solution but at least his explanations are rational, tech proved and it may works for someone. The less working space you have the less chance tear line hits an image.

[Gil_Hamilton]

Not square (square on top, video capture on bottom). Same size as NES/SNES pixels, BTW.

Man, major color bleeding. I would've guessed they were going for multi-color text.

Just a really bad case of composite artifacting.

Scary to think that some systems based their entire color generation mechanism around it(the Tandy CoCo and Apple 2 both use artifacting as their ONLY way to make color).

[Verdauga Greeneyes]

IMO it's the filter job to define the maximum scales allowed.

Now that -is- a good idea. It should be a simple matter to hardcode a setting in each filter that says what kinds of scaling factors they can be applied on. i.e. 0 for floating point, 1 for integer, 2 for multiples-of-two and so on. Then just apply the maximum factor that your resolution and the filter allow in fullscreen.

[FirebrandX]

widescreen?
You have the widescreen so what? Is'nt your widescreen can't possible show the full-screen image? Having just the black bars left and right, no? Seems i do not understand the beauty of the tiny image inside the gracefull black void. And i do not understand what the fullscreen term means too.

I'm not quite sure I understand you and perhaps there is a language barrier here. I was under the impression you wanted a maxed stretched image in fullscreen as the only setting available. I was explaining that there are many circumstances where this is not ideal, like my setup for example. I PREFER black borders on the sides and top/bottom in order to ensure the pixels are exact multiples as needed, as well as not messing up the effect of the scanline filter. Which brings me to your next bizarre point:

Scanlines?
Sorry but it is NOT scanlines. It is just "even lines fades by some% effect". It can't be compared to PAL\NTSC scanlines. True scanlines wouldn't look any uglier with non integer scale. It's just "black lines mask" that's all. Sort of moire. Yes, this mask do not work right with non integer scale. IMO it's the filter job to define the maximum scales allowed.

I KNOW what the filter does. We just call it "scanlines" for short because that is the effect it's trying to mimic. Also, it DOES look ugly when not scaled in multiples on an LCD screen. Ask anyone who has tried it and they will tell you the same thing.

non-stretched purist?

Yes. What's so hard to understand about that? I like all my games emulated in exact multiples of their original res. This avoids software aspect correction, which randomly distorts pixels in order to achieve a 4:3 aspect ratio. Hence, I'm a non-stretched purist. I also don't like bilinear filtering either because it just blurs the image in order to hide the problems of software stretching.

How about integer scales, looks like it's not stretching for you, right? If it's not stretching at all then the LCD technology is an

absolute crap

Again a language barrier. What I am saying is a max-stretched image looks like crap on an LCD if the native res is not a multiple of the emulated image. This is why I prefer the current system of letting the user choose a scale multiple for fullscreen. Why take away user control?

You simply defending your own tastes by the cost of sense and terminology. Even if you can't hook up the tube to PC it doesn't shift the meanings of the words. I do not deny anyones favourites i just want more rational explanation then "c**p", "s**t", etc.

You're simply not understanding the context of my point, which again seems to stem from a language barrier. Its not about taste, its about proven fact that a max stretched image will look bad on an LCD if the native res does not equal a multiple of the unstretched image. I find myself having to repeat this way too much here.

[blargg]

[SMS pixels are] Not square (square on top, video capture on bottom). Same size as NES/SNES pixels, BTW.

Man, major color bleeding. I would've guessed they were going for multi-color text.

Actually it's color fringing. As you can see from the RGB image on top, the text is supposed to be black. That's what you get when you don't vary the color carrier phase each scanline, as the NES/SNES do. Even the Sega Genesis makes vertical lines look like this on composite out. But as they say, Sega does what Nintendon't!

Just a really bad case of composite artifacting. Scary to think that some systems based their entire color generation mechanism around it(the Tandy CoCo and Apple 2 both use artifacting as their ONLY way to make color).

It's not really artifacting in that case. The pixel rate is greater than the color carrier frequency, so the system basically leaves it up to software to generate the composite signal waveform directly (albeit at only 1 bit per sample).

[FitzRoy]

I was under the impression you wanted a maxed stretched image in fullscreen as the only setting available.

bsnes locks the image to its aspect on fullscreen, I doubt he was suggesting getting rid of that.

Scanlines?
If the image isn't scaled in multiples, I don't want to see it.

Vertically, the emulator is already forced to do this in order to simulate the correct art proportions (for most games, there are exceptions) on modern displays.

Does anyone know why the scanline simulation isn't smart enough to account for horizontal line duplication?

I also don't like bilinear filtering either because it just blurs the image in order to hide the problems of software stretching.

I thought you said you liked the look of a television.

Its not about taste, its about proven fact that a max stretched image will look bad on an LCD if the native res does not equal a multiple of the unstretched image. I find myself having to repeat this way too much here.

So why not use windowed mode, then? Or are you basically admitting that having stuff around the image sucks, which is the reason I pushed fullscreen behavior to stretch to whatever frame boundary it hits first. I was willing to compromise, though, and have separate options so long as we could get the stupid basket of toggles consolidated.

[byuu]

Does anyone know why the scanline simulation isn't smart enough to account for horizontal line duplication?

Much the same reason why aspect correction looks like crap in point filtered mode. We aren't scaling the picture enough to hide the non-uniform lengths of each pixel row/column. If someone had a 25,600x16,000 19" monitor, you wouldn't really notice.

Linear filtering in this case just breaks the scanline illusion, whereas ARC doesn't rely on alternating columns.

There really should be two scanline filters. The kell effect is more closely simulated with a 2:3 color:black (requires 3x, 6x, ... scaling) ratio in progressive mode, and better with a 1:2 50% blend for interlace (requires 2x, 4x, 6x, ... scaling.)

Only CRTs and 30" LCDs can drive ~1766x1360 or whatever to get 6x for both.

So why not use windowed mode, then?

Black is less distracting than a taskbar.

That's what you get when you don't vary the color carrier phase each scanline, as the NES/SNES do. Even the Sega Genesis makes vertical lines look like this on composite out.

Wild :/
I never noticed color bleeding that badly on the Genesis as a kid. Then again I didn't even notice static width fonts in RPGs. Not too discerning back then.

[blargg]

What I am saying is a max-stretched image looks like crap on an LCD if the native res is not a multiple of the emulated image. This is why I prefer the current system of letting the user choose a scale multiple for fullscreen.

I took a Super Metroid image with lots of text and expanded it to 2x with scanlines. Then I expanded it to 4x with square pixels, and also 4x with stretched pixels for proper aspect ratio. Finally, I stretched it to 4.6875x with square and stretched pixels, to eliminate black borders on the top and bottom of an LCD that's 1050 pixels high. Not sure how you wanted scanlines, but ignoring possible issues with them, how do these look on your 1680x1050 LCD, particularly the stretched ones? It's not simple bilinear, so pixels have very little blur.

[franpa]

2x_square.png is not found.

[FitzRoy]

Much the same reason why aspect correction looks like crap in point filtered mode.

Actually, point mode is way, way less noticeable than the scanline issue. Dark pinstripes are so much easier to notice getting the odd dupe than a colorful background image because it's a pattern of lines themselves.

Man, software filters suck. The scale2x filter makes this god awful watercolor effect that smudges everything haphazardly together and destroys detail. The scanline filter destroys entire lines of detail. I can't believe people liked this, lo-res PC games certainly never tried to draw games this way to "improve" their image. It's like looking through wire mesh. There's clearly a group of people with huge cases of nostalgia for which PC emulation is never going to be sufficient. I wonder how they can even stand not playing on the real system.

We aren't scaling the picture enough to hide the non-uniform lengths of each pixel row/column. If someone had a 25,600x16,000 19" monitor, you wouldn't really notice.

Scaling is applied after the software filter is applied, right? Is it possible to do it before and then apply an integer scaled screendoor pattern on top. For example, 4.63x scaled image gets 4x scaled scanline pattern?

[Gil_Hamilton]

That's what you get when you don't vary the color carrier phase each scanline, as the NES/SNES do. Even the Sega Genesis makes vertical lines look like this on composite out.

Wild :/
I never noticed color bleeding that badly on the Genesis as a kid. Then again I didn't even notice static width fonts in RPGs. Not too discerning back then.

It's a lot less visible on a busy image than a static background.

http://www.disgruntleddesigner.com/chri ... shots.html has comparison shots of several games on several systems.


Some Genesis games actually used the composite noise/artifacts/what-have-you to generate extra colors(A limited application of the CoCo and Apple 2 effect), and Sonic even used it to fake transparency.

[h4tred]

Man, software filters suck. The scale2x filter makes this god awful watercolor effect that smudges everything haphazardly together and destroys detail. The scanline filter destroys entire lines of detail. I can't believe people liked this, lo-res PC games certainly never tried to draw games this way to "improve" their image. It's like looking through wire mesh. There's clearly a group of people with huge cases of nostalgia for which PC emulation is never going to be sufficient. I wonder how they can even stand not playing on the real system.

........So you are saying we should abandon ALL software filters and leave NTSC emulation intact, just to fit your tastes??? I guess it would lower bloat somewhat :/

[Gil_Hamilton]

The scanline filter destroys entire lines of detail.

No, it doesn't. It inserts extra lines BETWEEN lines of detail.

I can't believe people liked this, lo-res PC games certainly never tried to draw games this way to "improve" their image.

Yeah, because they didn't have any resolution to spare for filters.

I know of a few PC games that DID feature scanline filters, though.

There's clearly a group of people with huge cases of nostalgia

Duh. Why do you think emulators EXIST?

[tetsuo55]

That's what you get when you don't vary the color carrier phase each scanline, as the NES/SNES do. Even the Sega Genesis makes vertical lines look like this on composite out.

Wild :/
I never noticed color bleeding that badly on the Genesis as a kid. Then again I didn't even notice static width fonts in RPGs. Not too discerning back then.

It's a lot less visible on a busy image than a static background.

http://www.disgruntleddesigner.com/chri ... shots.html has comparison shots of several games on several systems.


Some Genesis games actually used the composite noise/artifacts/what-have-you to generate extra colors(A limited application of the CoCo and Apple 2 effect), and Sonic even used it to fake transparency.

I was disappointed that he did not test any games/scenes that depend on the scanlines or artifacts for rendering the correct image.

[_willow_]

software filters

I cannot remember my console unit made that bad image. If the PC system is able to produce better, sharper and colored image i do accept it as the natural "side" effect of more advanced display technologies. You may ask to people watching dvd or rips either they do prefer scanlines or HQ2X or damaged NTSC connection emulation. Console units do not make any difference to VHS players. Console have the same fullscreen and the same colors, it's the interactive movie projector.

[FitzRoy]

The scanline filter destroys entire lines of detail.

No, it doesn't. It inserts extra lines BETWEEN lines of detail.

Detail is a collective of parts, if you separate a head from its body, you're destroying detail.

Yeah, because they didn't have any resolution to spare for filters.

Nonsense, look at all the lo-res homebrew games coming out on the PC even today. They have plenty of resolution to spare, breaking apart the lines would be trivial.

I know of a few PC games that DID feature scanline filters, though.

I know a few countries that eat elephant balls to enhance libido. If scanlines enhanced the image, it wouldn't be a rarity, it would be commonplace.

There's clearly a group of people with huge cases of nostalgia

Duh. Why do you think emulators EXIST?

Because the games are fun, free, and far more convenient to play on computers. Nostalgia is simply sentiment for something old and familiar, it has nothing to do with whether it was good or not.

........So you are saying we should abandon ALL software filters and leave NTSC emulation intact, just to fit your tastes??? I guess it would lower bloat somewhat :/

Personally, my tastes are a polka dotted screen, but no one respected them enough to add it.

Still want to reduce the inclusion argument to "preference?" I have lots of preferences for you to add.

[Gil_Hamilton]

The scanline filter destroys entire lines of detail.

No, it doesn't. It inserts extra lines BETWEEN lines of detail.

Detail is a collective of parts, if you separate a head from its body, you're destroying detail.

Or ARE you?
The scanline effect encourages the brain to fill in the detail that doesn't exist, resulting in a picture that looks less jagged, even though it really isn't.


I could argue artist intent, but I suspect the logic would fall on deaf ears(blind eyes?).

Yeah, because they didn't have any resolution to spare for filters.

Nonsense, look at all the lo-res homebrew games coming out on the PC even today. They have plenty of resolution to spare, breaking apart the lines would be trivial.

You spoke in the past-tense. I assumed you meant older commercial games.

I know of a few PC games that DID feature scanline filters, though.

I know a few countries that eat elephant balls to enhance libido. If scanlines enhanced the image, it wouldn't be a rarity, it would be commonplace.

It's a "right tool for the right job" issue.

A hammer is not always what you want. But when you DO want it, there's nothing better.