Just tell me if I am annoying with too many updates.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/TeBNc.png[/img] [img]http://i.imgur.com/KFdNb.png[/img]
Multiplayer! Unlimited number of linked portals.
Also I have discovered that my portal test level is possible with no jumping.
[QUOTE=AgentBoomstick;31217810]Anybody have experience with Box2D with SFML? How is it? Is there a better replacement?[/QUOTE]
I just started with Box2D and SFML. It's excellent and very easy to combine these libraries. I've looked for other 2d physics libraries and none of them are as easy as Box2D! A good place to start is [url]http://box2dsfmlfun.blogspot.com/[/url]
[QUOTE=Maurice;31222194]Just tell me if I am annoying with too many updates.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/TeBNc.png[/img] [img]http://i.imgur.com/KFdNb.png[/img]
Multiplayer! Unlimited number of linked portals.
Also I have discovered that my portal test level is possible with no jumping.[/QUOTE]
Hurry up and let us test.
We love you!
[editline]20th July 2011[/editline]
Also, what tileset are you using? I've been needing a tileset like that, I've been wanting to make a tile platformer and figured that was the best place to start.
[QUOTE=Map in a box;31222523]Also, what tileset are you using? I've been needing a tileset like that, I've been wanting to make a tile platformer and figured that was the best place to start.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://filesmelt.com/dl/layer1.png[/url]
IMHO OpenGL 3 isn't really worth learning compared to a more supported version like OpenGL 2.
I went from OpenGL 3 to 2 (having learned only 3.x first), and the only thing I really miss is vertex array objects...but I was able to abstract stuff to the point where it doesn't matter. The other big difference is how shaders are written. Other than that, it seems that you can write undeprecated code without actually creating an OpenGL 3.x context.
SFML didn't quite fit up to my needs, so I'm writing my own 2D Game Framework through OpenTK.
It's going pretty swell so far:
[img]http://i53.tinypic.com/k20gt1.png[/img]
And this is all it took to produce that:
[csharp]
using System;
using Cloud;
using OpenTK;
namespace Fleo
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Display Game = new Display(640, 480);
Game.Title = "Fleo" + " (" + Info.Build + ") (" + Info.Version + ")";
Image Test = new Image("test.png");
Test.Position = new Vector2(100, 25);
Test.Rotation = 25;
Test.Width = Test.Width * 2;
Test.Height = Test.Height * 2;
Test.SubRect = new Vector4(0, 0, Test.Width * 5, Test.Height * 5);
Game.Renders += (s, e) =>
{
Test.Draw();
};
Game.Run(60, 60);
}
}
}
[/csharp]
I'm making a impossible to guess name mario clone, and borrowing Maurices sprites due to how they are laid out so well. To maurice: You're awesome.
Added some really nice (imho) input.
[csharp]
Game.Updates += (s, e) =>
{
Test.Rotation += Input.Mouse.Left.Duration;
if (Input.Keyboard[Key.Space].Duration >= 0.01f)
Test.Color = new Color(255, 0, 0);
};
[/csharp]
EDIT:
If this were a highway, we would have crashed.
~Broke my Merge~
[QUOTE=NorthernGate;31223771]Added some really nice (imho) input.
[csharp]
Game.Updates += (s, e) =>
{
Test.Rotation += Input.Mouse.Left.Duration;
if (Input.Keyboard[Key.Space].Duration >= 0.01f)
Test.Color = new Color(255, 0, 0);
};
[/csharp]
EDIT:
If this were a highway, we would have crashed.
~Broke my Merge~[/QUOTE]
You better know I broke your merge.
[editline]20th July 2011[/editline]
Also, how do you do that += thing, is oh yeah its C# but still how do
[QUOTE=Map in a box;31223784]You better know I broke your merge.
[editline]20th July 2011[/editline]
Also, how do you do that += thing, is oh yeah its C# but still how do[/QUOTE]
In C# events have two commands add and remove, add is mapped to the += operator and takes a function with specific parameters, pretty much a function pointer, and remove is mapped to the -= operator, which takes away a function from that event so that function is no longer called when the event is invoked.
The (s, e) => { ... } stuff is what happens when you use awesome anonymous functions through the lambda operator (=>), which basically lets you make a function on the fly.
Further ( and more explanatory ) Reading : [url]http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb397687.aspx[/url]
[QUOTE=NorthernGate;31223855]In C# events have two commands add and remove, add is mapped to the += operator and takes a function with specific parameters, pretty much a function pointer, and remove is mapped to the -= operator, which takes away a function from that event so that function is no longer called when the event is invoked.
The (s, e) => { ... } stuff is what happens when you use awesome anonymous functions through the lambda operator (=>), which basically lets you make a function on the fly.
Further ( and more explanatory ) Reading : [url]http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb397687.aspx[/url][/QUOTE]
Neat. It always bothered me.
Why does FP thing Overv is in Sweden?
Is Overv in Sweden?
So here's a question: If you have an application written in some OO language and you have a load of objects which represent, at runtime, information stored in a DB, how would you build the DB tables?
Keep in mind that there's a bunch of inheritance going on. That is, there is an object called base (or something equivalent) which has an id, a date of creation, a creator, etc etc as member variables and then everything in the system inherits from that adding whatever is necessary to represent a more specific object (say, a user). These later ones can also be further derived, obviously.
So, I see two options:
1) Make a table for each type of object. Then when I store an object, write each part of its information in the appropriate table. Keep them all linked through an unique key (unique in each table but repeated across tables). This has the obvious inconvenient of requiring several write queries. Reading only requires one query but it's still a more complex one.
2) Only make tables for each of the bottom-most objects in the inheritance tree which have columns for every field of the most specified object and also for every field of every object it inherits from. This saves on the number of queries, but raises problems with keep unique keys synced. I don't want a user and a PM having repeated IDs, for example, so I'd need to add some sort of master table for key assignment, which is a pain.
Ideas?
[editline]edit[/editline]
Btw, by DB I mean an SQL DB (probably MySQL)
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/C8IiS.png[/IMG]
Random bullet spread and terrain destruction. Now to add weapon systems and explosions.
[QUOTE=grlira;31224746]So here's a question: If you have an application written in some OO language and you have a load of objects which represent, at runtime, information stored in a DB, how would you build the DB tables?
Keep in mind that there's a bunch of inheritance going on. That is, there is an object called base (or something equivalent) which has an id, a date of creation, a creator, etc etc as member variables and then everything in the system inherits from that adding whatever is necessary to represent a more specific object (say, a user). These later ones can also be further derived, obviously.
So, I see two options:
1) Make a table for each type of object. Then when I store an object, write each part of its information in the appropriate table. Keep them all linked through an unique key (unique in each table but repeated across tables). This has the obvious inconvenient of requiring several write queries. Reading only requires one query but it's still a more complex one.
2) Only make tables for each of the bottom-most objects in the inheritance tree which have columns for every field of the most specified object and also for every field of every object it inherits from. This saves on the number of queries, but raises problems with keep unique keys synced. I don't want a user and a PM having repeated IDs, for example, so I'd need to add some sort of master table for key assignment, which is a pain.
Ideas?
[editline]edit[/editline]
Btw, by DB I mean an SQL DB (probably MySQL)[/QUOTE]
Is it not an option to just 'forget' about inheritance and store all of the (also inherited) information in the appropriate table for the type of object at hand?
Im still amazed how fast computers do stuff.
I pinged 16million Ip's in 6Min~ (17% of the Ip's responded)
[url]http://pastebin.com/tQCSMF5N[/url]
Will post the output ina bit in the vague hope that someone will do something visual with it
[QUOTE=Maurice;31226475]Proper portal drawing!
[url]http://i.imgur.com/wCImi.gif[/url]
Run, mario.[/QUOTE]
Sexy, you're making this in löve2d, right?
[QUOTE=Spoco;31225701]Is it not an option to just 'forget' about inheritance and store all of the (also inherited) information in the appropriate table for the type of object at hand?[/QUOTE]
If I understood you correctly, that's what I meant by option 2. The problem with that is that I would have separate tables for, say, users and PMs, and each of those would have an unique key (an id field) and I don't want it to be possible to have an user with id 1 and then a PM with id 1 as well. (what should happen is, if the user was created first, then he would get id 1, and the PM would get id 2, and something else created later (be it user or PM), would have id 3)
If you mean to just have one table with every possible field, no...That's just messy :S
[QUOTE=DrLuke;31226506]Sexy, you're making this in löve2d, right?[/QUOTE]
Yep. It's the only language I know (lua).
Mainly because I am lazy as fuck. And I find getting into a language really hard. I tried flashpunk but it's just.. I dunno.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/nJlAI.png[/img]
I don't think it's worth it to make situations like that kill the player.
[quote=grlira;31226522]I don't ([b]want?[/b]) it to be possible to have an user with id 1 and then a PM with id 1 as well.[/quote]
Why not?
[QUOTE=Maurice;31226557]Yep. It's the only language I know (lua).
Mainly because I am lazy as fuck. And I find getting into a language really hard. I tried flashpunk but it's just.. I dunno.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/nJlAI.png[/img]
I don't think it's worth it to make situations like that kill the player.[/QUOTE]
Telefrags!
[editline]20th July 2011[/editline]
Telefragging is one of the most enjoyable ways to kill people in games, I find.
As in, telefrag the goomba, not the player.
[QUOTE=mechanarchy;31226781]Telefrags!
[editline]20th July 2011[/editline]
Telefragging is one of the most enjoyable ways to kill people in games, I find.
As in, telefrag the goomba, not the player.[/QUOTE]
But portals aren't teleporters, you'd actually be walking into the goomba.
[QUOTE=Maurice;31226813]But portals aren't teleporters, you'd actually be walking into the goomba.[/QUOTE]
Unless Mario is a fatass, then it'd be squishing the goomba.
[QUOTE=Spoco;31226683]Why not?[/QUOTE]
Ye missed the what there, sorry.
Among other things, different types of users might have some files stored in the system (their photo/logo, for example) which will be named by their id.
[QUOTE=grlira;31226907]Ye missed the what there, sorry.
Among other things, different types of users might have some files stored in the system (their photo/logo, for example) which will be named by their id.[/QUOTE]
But that should be the unique id / primary index for the user in the users table? Surely all your different types of users don't have that much different info that you couldn't store them in the same table? I still don't understand why PMs (Private Messages, I assume?) and users should share the same unique index. Private messages should have their own table with their own primary unique index and sender/recipient fields that in turn point to the users index.
I'm really confused, what's this all for?
[QUOTE=Maurice;31226813]But portals aren't teleporters, you'd actually be walking into the goomba.[/QUOTE]
Hitting it from above should kill the bastard ;D
[QUOTE=Chris220;31227098]Hitting it from above should kill the bastard ;D[/QUOTE]
But you'd be smashing it with your face.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
