[QUOTE=Asgard;32003575]It spins around the torus, isn't that good enough? :v:[/QUOTE]
but, does it spin [i]through[/i] the torus :smug:
I saw Mari0 on reddit today, too.
Yup, [url=http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/jxphx/super_mario_bros_with_a_portal_gun/]here[/url].
[editline]bla[/editline]
And [url=http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/jvjmc/when_mario_meets_portal_wow/]here[/url].
yey for Maurice!
Congrats Maurice!
Good job Maurice!
Thanks guys :)
Though this means I'll actually have to work on it, oh no!
In related news, I added a visibility option to Back2Work
[img]http://i.imgur.com/PxFBf.png[/img]
It pretty much does what you think it does
Here's the options menu so far
[img]http://i.imgur.com/DIgjB.png[/img]
Any suggestions I might've left out? (Or ignored while I was in a bubble bath)
[QUOTE=Quark:;32004365][img]http://i.imgur.com/PxFBf.png[/img][/QUOTE]
Firstly: [✔] Task Manager Only
Secondly: Add an entry for taskmgr.exe (and taskkill.exe if you so desire).
Thirdly: Revenue.
(easy to circumvent, I know - but still...)
In order to become really good at programming you have to constantly tell yourself that you're bad and that your code, even after hours of programming, is the dumbest thing you have ever seen.
[QUOTE=Deco Da Man;32004424]Firstly: [✔] Task Manager Only
Secondly: Add an entry for taskmgr.exe (and taskkill.exe if you so desire).
Thirdly: Revenue.
(easy to circumvent, I know - but still...)[/QUOTE]
I don't know if I'm quite sure what you mean
Add an option to open taskmgr.exe?
[editline]29th August 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=AtomiCasd;32004444]In order to become really good at programming you have to constantly tell yourself that you're bad and that your code, even after hours of programming, is the dumbest thing you have ever seen.[/QUOTE]Is this the same as how people get sexy, by telling themselves they're ugly over and over because it never works for me
I meant it like you work through iterations
[QUOTE=Quark:;32004459]I don't know if I'm quite sure what you mean
Add an option to open taskmgr.exe?[/QUOTE]
I assume the "visibility option" means that Back2Work is only available in the chosen area.
If you add the entry to Back2Work to close any instance of taskmgr.exe and taskkill.exe, it'd be quite annoying to close Back2Work.
[/b]edit:[/b] By the way, the menu design is good. Is that part of Back2Work, or is it your computers scheme?
I can't really say that I'm working on anything new (still working on a tile map format), but this video really is tempting me to pick up ASM for Super Mario World.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLX_HDI6ExE&feature=feedu[/media]
[QUOTE=AtomiCasd;32004444]In order to become really good at programming you have to constantly tell yourself that you're bad and that your code, even after hours of programming, is the dumbest thing you have ever seen.[/QUOTE]
That might be a little extreme. You just have to be able to admit your faults, you don't have to go out of the way to make problems where none exist.
[QUOTE=Deco Da Man;32004524]I assume the "visibility option" means that Back2Work is only available in the chosen area.
If you add the entry to Back2Work to close any instance of taskmgr.exe and taskkill.exe, it'd be quite annoying to close Back2Work.
[/b]edit:[/b] By the way, the menu design is good. Is that part of Back2Work, or is it your computers scheme?[/QUOTE]It's Back2Work
[img]http://i.imgur.com/Kk2Xx.png[/img]
[img]http://i.imgur.com/gumLZ.png[/img]
[img]http://i.imgur.com/nEJlw.png[/img]
I can add an option to manually type in a process name, to block taskmgr.exe I guess. And other .exe's you can't find the folder for. Thanks for the idea, adding this now!
[QUOTE=AtomiCasd;32004444]In order to become really good at programming you have to constantly tell yourself that you're bad and that your code, even after hours of programming, is the dumbest thing you have ever seen.[/QUOTE]
To an extent no it's not stupid, however it gets to a certain point where some programmers stop doing any work and constantly pick tiny holes in what they're doing (Generally with the thought process "if I do this it'll be more future safe" or "if I do this it'll run 16ms faster"). Both of these practices while in theory are good, for getting actual work done they're terrible.
Chances are if what you are doing is readable, functional and you don't have [b]significant[/b] performance issues it's fine.
What with the fad of n-body simulations, I thought I'd make one too. When two bodies get within eachother's radii, they merge into a single body with the sum of the masses of the two bodies and in the middle of their two positions. The problem is, I want larger bodies to be able to break apart on impact with either the walls or with other large bodies, not just get absorbed. Is there a relatively simple way to do this without actually simulating it (which I'd rather not do, collisions between circles is easy, basically anything else is not)?
[b]Edit:[/b] Something like Osmos but where the circles can break apart if they're moving fast enough.
[QUOTE=AtomiCasd;32004444]In order to become really good at programming you have to constantly tell yourself that you're bad and that your code, even after hours of programming, is the dumbest thing you have ever seen.[/QUOTE]
I used to think that way.
It's the wrong way to go about it.
If you are to constantly tell yourself anything, it should be that the quality of programming is not defined by the process, but by the outcomes and how the end result suites the purpose it was designed for.
In your mind, you have a series of ideas and concepts. These ideologies are constructed by your knowledge and wisdom in their appropriate areas of expertise.
Programming as a trade is, ultimately, the application of concepts.
Take, for example, a pretty much destroyed starship that has been set on a collision course with an enemy ship - a last desperate measure taken by the captain to save his crew.
The sole purpose of the subroutine is to control the behavior of the ship in order to achieve the collision.
Idea (i.e: purpose): a starship, in a known environment (sensors), needing to crash into a known target.
Concepts: physics, engine control (may include more advanced things: pathfinding, enemy behaviour prediction, etc)
One's understanding of physics tells them they'll need to solve equations to calculate the direction of travel and the acceleration required.
Being able to program well is the ability for you to apply this understanding and create a program that will do the request operation.
Whether you have high-school level or Ph.D level knowledge of physics, as long as your program properly reflects the behavior you expected (whether what you expected is right or wrong) then it is a [u]successful[/u] program.
Now, obviously, a proper collision course subroutine for a starship would have many more parameters to its requirements.
The "purpose" of the program would be adjusted to include things such as readable source and use of never-crashing code.
In business situations where you must work as a team, it is a necessity that the requirements brief includes a "readable source" clause.
In game situations, where smooth gameplay is desired, optimisation should be a requirement as well.
If you want to make a quick million-dollar profit game.. who cares about neat source code and optimisation!
Do a Notch and make it with unoptimised Java!
All that matters is how the program turns out and whether it suites the requirements.
[b]Edit:[/b]
Note that I ‒ and most other programmers, I'm sure ‒ try to keep "readable source" and "follows standards" [i]somewhere[/i] on our list.
If it's not too annoying, "optimisation" can tag along for the ride... but if you're doing a Notch, don't be afraid to throw it out the window so you can get stuff done.
([u]Disclaimer[/u]: I don't actually know if Notch's optimisation is as bad as they say; I don't wish to falsely ridicule him, but if it's true... it's a good example)
What was that tool called that analysed your code and told you things that you could do to improve it (like spelling and following convention etc)?
[QUOTE=Deco Da Man;32005014]If you want to make a quick million-dollar profit game.. who cares about neat source code and optimisation!
Do a Notch and make it with unoptimised Java![/QUOTE]
I'll be sure to remember this every time I lag through a piston or have bizarre race conditions from unpredictable redstone propagation delays.
[QUOTE=Maurice;32004241]Good job Maurice!
Thanks guys :)
Though this means I'll actually have to work on it, oh no![/QUOTE]
So what did the guy from lucas arts want?
[QUOTE=Richy19;32005348]So what did the guy from lucas arts want?[/QUOTE]
I dunno he didn't write back (yet).
[QUOTE=Maurice;32005417]I dunno he didn't write back (yet).[/QUOTE]
When your a massive inde developer, can you hire us all?
Dibs on the biggest paycheck.
[QUOTE=NorthernGate;32005661]Dibs on the biggest paycheck.[/QUOTE]
Dibs on your paycheck
[QUOTE=Asgard;32005689]Dibs on your paycheck[/QUOTE]
Dibs on this guy's paycheck
r4nk_ just wants all the money to himself. :colbert:
You're all fired.
I'm taking the color printer then
[QUOTE=Maurice;32006269]You're all fired.[/QUOTE]
In all seriousness how did you get so much publicity?
By making something awesome :v:
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
