What Are You Working On? July 2015 - Developers

[img]http://i.cubeupload.com/oHhRXU.png[/img] Making a game where you're an ice cream truck driver and you give drugs to kids. you're delusional 9/10ths of the time you see candyland and you're giving them candy but occasionally you flash into reality to jam a needle into their arms for a few seconds. [vid]http://i.imgur.com/nDz9xzw.webm[/vid] the gif recording software skips frames but the truck shakes up and down. I had a bug earlier since I was using setInterval(), setTimeout() and clearTimeout() to make it shake, and clearing it sometimes made the truck not go back after shaking up/down so the truck dug its way underground lol.

[IMG]http://i.gyazo.com/827a7ba670ce58db73e1e856ccf9041b.png[/IMG] That feeling when your polyspacial lettering system malfunctions due to clampless miss-configuration during the initialization of a sprite batch

[QUOTE=Fourier;48156596]Amm emmm it pushes something [editline]9th July 2015[/editline] What game is that?[/QUOTE] [URL="http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=463312881"]knew i should've probably linked it lol[/URL]

looks pretty cool when it's rotated. too bad you'll never see this in-game. [img]http://giant.gfycat.com/AcrobaticHoarseElkhound.gif[/img]

[QUOTE=Jallen;48158452]They lack creativity and have a peasant mind.[/QUOTE] This made me laugh out loud in my work cafeteria. You're pretty much right but the way you phrased this is goofy.

Kinda looks like massive chalice EDIT: Embed the webm instead of gif pls, [url]http://fat.gfycat.com/AcrobaticHoarseElkhound.webm[/url]

[QUOTE=Foda;48159586]looks pretty cool when it's rotated. too bad you'll never see this in-game.[/QUOTE] That'd be a great level start effect. Do that, starting a little zoomed out, then zoom into the character's normal view area

[QUOTE=Foda;48159586]looks pretty cool when it's rotated. too bad you'll never see this in-game. [img]http://giant.gfycat.com/AcrobaticHoarseElkhound.gif[/img][/QUOTE] Find a way to fit it in. Level transition or some boss fight intro or something

[QUOTE=Foda;48159586] [img_thumb]http://giant.gfycat.com/AcrobaticHoarseElkhound.gif[/img_thumb][/QUOTE] This is so sexy god fucking damn it

[QUOTE=Trumple;48159711]Find a way to fit it in. Level transition or some boss fight intro or something[/QUOTE] Maybe something end-game (think fez)

[QUOTE=Jallen;48158452]I don't think I'll ever enjoy work. I love programming, I mean I taught myself and made loads of things, I'd get an idea and obsess over the development of it. But here's the thing, when you go to work you aren't making that thing you are temporarily obsessed with. You are making something that somebody else wants. You are creating somebody elses dream, not yours. When I'm not in a job I don't just sit there and play games. I'm programming my own projects, reading up on topics of interest both technical and otherwise, drawing / painting, doing photography. It bothers me so much when people say "I'd still have a job if I won the lottery" or "I'd get bored without a job". They lack creativity and have a peasant mind. If I won the lottery I'd be churning out personal projects like a factory.[/QUOTE] Thanks for the insult. As a proud peasant I would like to say that I feel sorry for you, you will never feel the awesome of getting work done. Working is awesome. Not all working, but the kind you like. [editline]10th July 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=01271;48158792][img]http://i.cubeupload.com/oHhRXU.png[/img] Making a game where you're an ice cream truck driver and you give drugs to kids. you're delusional 9/10ths of the time you see candyland and you're giving them candy but occasionally you flash into reality to jam a needle into their arms for a few seconds. [vid]http://i.imgur.com/nDz9xzw.webm[/vid] the gif recording software skips frames but the truck shakes up and down. I had a bug earlier since I was using setInterval(), setTimeout() and clearTimeout() to make it shake, and clearing it sometimes made the truck not go back after shaking up/down so the truck dug its way underground lol.[/QUOTE] Twin towers in background?

[QUOTE=Jallen;48158452]I don't think I'll ever enjoy work. I love programming, I mean I taught myself and made loads of things, I'd get an idea and obsess over the development of it. But here's the thing, when you go to work you aren't making that thing you are temporarily obsessed with. You are making something that somebody else wants. You are creating somebody elses dream, not yours. When I'm not in a job I don't just sit there and play games. I'm programming my own projects, reading up on topics of interest both technical and otherwise, drawing / painting, doing photography. It bothers me so much when people say "I'd still have a job if I won the lottery" or "I'd get bored without a job". They lack creativity and have a peasant mind. If I won the lottery I'd be churning out personal projects like a factory.[/QUOTE] This is 100% exactly why I want to run my own business for the rest of my life.

I've been programming in C++ for a few years now and with all my projects I still have no idea the differences between /MD and /MT and I swear half of my 3rd party stuff uses /MT and the other half uses /MT but everything is working and I'm afraid if I try to make sense of it now it'll all fall to pieces.

[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;48159902]Twin towers in background?[/QUOTE] Intentionally taking place in 2001 so I can fucking blow them up for extra "wow that's fucking distasteful" points. [vid]http://i.imgur.com/8lSd34z.webm[/vid] this is what candyland looks like so far, still have placeholders in.

[QUOTE=WTF Nuke;48160814]I've been programming in C++ for a few years now and with all my projects I still have no idea the differences between /MD and /MT and I swear half of my 3rd party stuff uses /MT and the other half uses /MT but everything is working and I'm afraid if I try to make sense of it now it'll all fall to pieces.[/QUOTE] Is this VisualStudio? Afaik /MT packs the visual studio runtime libraries into the binaries or some shit while /MD requires the user have the runtime libraries already installed on their computer somewhere. /MD allows for a smaller executable file and whatnot and sometimes, my projects don't compile with /MT, but compile with /MD-- i have no idea why or some shit

Went back into C++. God, I forgot how dumb that language is sometimes, like how you can't ask an array (which has to have a statically defined size), what the size is...

[QUOTE=DoctorSalt;48161393]Went back into C++. God, I forgot how dumb that language is sometimes, like how you can't ask an array (which has to have a statically defined size), what the size is...[/QUOTE] Primitive arrays in practically every language are static. If you want something like a C# List<T> in C++, use a std::vector.

[QUOTE=WTF Nuke;48160814]I've been programming in C++ for a few years now and with all my projects I still have no idea the differences between /MD and /MT and I swear half of my 3rd party stuff uses /MT and the other half uses /MT but everything is working and I'm afraid if I try to make sense of it now it'll all fall to pieces.[/QUOTE] /MD dynamically links to the runtime (msvcrt), /MT statically links. Generally speaking, dynamic linking is better for system libraries.

Second programming interview awwww yeee. I think I did pretty well. They let me choose from 3 tasks that were supposed to take 2 hours or so; they ended up asking me to do another one after I did the first. TripleByte is pretty cool. [url=https://triplebyte.com]You should check them out[/url] if you are looking for a job / interviewing experience. All online interviews, you work in your IDE of choice. P great.

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;48157923]Right arm is worse now imo, looks like he is "bending" stuff as in avatar airbender sense Also goes into the body, afaik this should be a bad thing I would suggest it to stay kinda still, shake a little but just follow the torso and not move too much[/QUOTE] the problem is the torso needs to twist with the arm direction and the head needs to go down as well you can totally tell when the shoulder goes down, it looks like it popped out of the arm. the torso should be following with the shoulder. i dunno how to explain it more lol..

[QUOTE=01271;48161148]Intentionally taking place in 2001 so I can fucking blow them up for extra "wow that's fucking distasteful" points. this is what candyland looks like so far, still have placeholders in.[/QUOTE] thats pretty distasteful dude

[QUOTE=SteveUK;48161428]Primitive arrays in practically every language are static. If you want something like a C# List<T> in C++, use a std::vector.[/QUOTE] Sorry, I meant that you have to know at compile time how large they are, and despite that an array cannot tell how long it is.

[QUOTE=DoctorSalt;48161841]Sorry, I meant that you have to know at compile time how large they are, and despite that an array cannot tell how long it is.[/QUOTE] Use [url=http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/container/array]std::array[/url] if you want that. [editline]9th July 2015[/editline] Hell, may as well just always use std::array instead of plain C-style arrays. No real reason not to.

The reason you can't sizeof arrays is because when you pass them they decay into pointers which don't contain the information of the size. You can sizeof compile time sized arrays though, as long as they don't decay into pointers. Like this: [cpp]float in[] = {4.f, 2.f, 0.f}; std::cout<< sizeof(in);[/cpp] Should print something like 12. It's actually kind of weird, since when you use delete[] the system knows the size of the array it is deleting (which is why there is delete and delete[]). I think it's related to not knowing if the pointer is pointing to heap or to stack, but I have no idea. Actually I think the reason you can't access the size of something you new[]'d is because it's not standardized but rather implementation dependent. In the end just use std::array for all your array needs.

[QUOTE=WTF Nuke;48161932]The reason you can't sizeof arrays is because when you pass them they decay into pointers which don't contain the information of the size. You can sizeof compile time sized arrays though, as long as they don't decay into pointers. Like this: [cpp]float in[] = {4.f, 2.f, 0.f}; std::cout<< sizeof(in);[/cpp] Should print something like 12. It's actually kind of weird, since when you use delete[] the system knows the size of the array it is deleting (which is why there is delete and delete[]). I think it's related to not knowing if the pointer is pointing to heap or to stack, but I have no idea. Actually I think the reason you can't access the size of something you new[]'d is because it's not standardized but rather implementation dependent. In the end just use std::array for all your array needs.[/QUOTE] Seems like something that can be solved with syntactic sugar and used java style, but isn't. (Like header file management)

It's not going to ever be solved with sugar, since the effects of array to pointer decay are widely used and abused, and the storage the size of a new[] call is implementation dependent. Plus, it speaks nothing about a simple pointer passed as an array. How do you differentiate between that and a new[] pointer? std::array provides compile time size without an additional member cluttering the array.

[QUOTE=DoctorSalt;48161967]Seems like something that can be solved with syntactic sugar and used java style, but isn't. (Like header file management)[/QUOTE] Again, just use C++11's std::array then. It's a C-style array with no overhead but it knows how large it is. Literally no downside to using it.

[QUOTE=WTF Nuke;48161932]The reason you can't sizeof arrays is because when you pass them they decay into pointers which don't contain the information of the size. You can sizeof compile time sized arrays though, as long as they don't decay into pointers. Like this: [cpp]float in[] = {4.f, 2.f, 0.f}; std::cout<< sizeof(in);[/cpp] Should print something like 12. It's actually kind of weird, since when you use delete[] the system knows the size of the array it is deleting (which is why there is delete and delete[]). I think it's related to not knowing if the pointer is pointing to heap or to stack, but I have no idea. Actually I think the reason you can't access the size of something you new[]'d is because it's not standardized but rather implementation dependent. In the end just use std::array for all your array needs.[/QUOTE] Yeah, you'd think pointers don't know their size, but how could you free them then?

I said they DO know their size. It's just implementation based and not revealed to the user. What I mean is only new[] points know their size, not just any old pointer. So if you decayed a stack array to a pointer, it wouldn't know its size.

if you've seen person of interest or don't plan to(this would mean your privilege needs checking, by the way), [URL="http://tatr.cf/uploads/samaritan.webm"]look what I made.[/URL]