What are you working on? - Developers

Currently trying to make this work... [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1500070[/url]

[QUOTE=delular100;49463268]Currently trying to make this work... [URL]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1500070[/URL][/QUOTE] People WILL NOT and ARE NOT going to devote a incredible amount of time to YOUR project of which you've already said YOU won't devote the time to. [QUOTE=delular100;49459387] Also, if i decided to buy those softwares and learn things by myself, [B]despites the colossal time it would take[/B], the used version of them costs, converted to my country currency, 110% of a month of my salary. I really need a team, a small one, of people intrested on working on it...[/QUOTE] You are saying you have the ability to run the game development, but do you even know what that means? You're trying to tell me you have to time to be the producer for a game(which is a huge fucking job), reap the benefits, but not actually fucking develop it or even ATTEMPT to look for free resources? Dude come on. *Edit: You're also planning on starting your own indie game company according to your post. Good luck with that time commitment if you can't make the commitment to learning a programming language.

[QUOTE=delular100;49463268]Currently trying to make this work... [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1500070[/url][/QUOTE] I admire what you're trying to do, because I also have these absurdly numerous and high goals that don't seem realistic even to myself, and I think at different points in time people asked me what it was that I was trying to accomplish. I'm on my third year now with my project and if I could give you any advice, it would be to not rely on anyone at first. You need to grow something yourself, and attract people to work on it. You need to make something people want, and something developers want to be a part of, or tinker with. The latter part I'm still struggling with. It seems like you have a lot of ideas but nothing to show for it. I'm kind of in the reverse position. I have two years of work, a few ideas, and [i]almost[/i] nothing to show for it. You need to have some form of work done though, and you're not working in the right direction. You've just built up aspirations rather than a product. You have no chance of acquiring a team or even a collective of developers who are interested in your ideas if you don't sow a seed first. [QUOTE]I am not currently in position of learning things by myself and trying to do everything on my own, it's not going to work out.[/QUOTE] I'm in the position of learning how to do things by myself, trying to do everything on my own, and trying to do it better than people who have been doing their respective things for years. There's a couple people from Planimeter who I've told them that I want to be better at X than them, even though they've been doing it far longer than I have. You have to work hard if you want to do this. It's not a low effort, high impact venture. It's a high effort, low impact dream. If you're not willing to drain your time into it and sacrifice a lot of comfort then you don't have what it takes. So you better give up now or get with it.

[QUOTE=amcwatters;49463368]I admire what you're trying to do, because I also have these absurdly numerous and high goals that don't seem realistic even to myself, and I think at different points in time people asked me what it was that I was trying to accomplish. I'm on my third year now with my project and if I could give you any advice, it would be to not rely on anyone at first. You need to grow something yourself, and attract people to work on it. You need to make something people want, and something developers want to be a part of, or tinker with. The latter part I'm still struggling with. It seems like you have a lot of ideas but nothing to show for it. I'm kind of in the reverse position. I have two years of work, a few ideas, and [i]almost[/i] nothing to show for it. You need to have some form of work done though, and you're not working in the right direction. You've just built up aspirations rather than a product. You have no chance of acquiring a team or even a collective of developers who are interested in your ideas if you don't sow a seed first. I'm in the position of learning how to do things by myself, trying to do everything on my own, and trying to do it better than people who have been doing their respective things for years. There's a couple people from Planimeter who I've told them that I want to be better at X than them, even though they've been doing it far longer than I have. You have to work hard if you want to do this. It's not a low effort, high impact venture. It's a high effort, low impact dream. If you're not willing to drain your time into it and sacrifice a lot of comfort then you don't have what it takes. So you better give up now or get with it.[/QUOTE] My main problems are: - The country i live in (Brazil) has almost nothing of development industry. Anyone who wants to grow here needs to do things by themselves, learn by themselves. - The country is on crisis and i can't even dream of leaving my job, where i work 10 hours per day. I also need a work to make money and pay for my things. At my work i have time to answer and talk to people throught the computer. Imagining if i had someone working with me, i would explain the situation to my boss and the employee that work with me and i they would understand that sometimes i need to stop what i'm doing for a brief time. This is much simple on my head, but it seems i'm just too ignorant at this subject of looking for a team. On my ignorant thoughts i just imagine myself building everything from scratch with whoever joins, but it seems that i need to build the scratches myself only... It just works well. On my head. Guess i'm being too much optmistic!

[QUOTE=delular100;49463696][...] It just works well. On my head. Guess i'm being too much optmistic![/QUOTE] At least moderately, yes. Assuming you can indeed use your work computer privately for small bits of time, I recommend you start by reading freely available programming tutorials and/or documentation. I don't know much regarding resources for the "quick path" through existing engines, but I'm sure others here have a few recommendations. It's likely going to be quite some work to reach a level at which you're good enough though. With programming you can generally reach "it kind of works, but it crashes and runs slowly" fairly quickly but "it performs well and is good enough to sell" takes much more time for most people.

Making a ""game engine"" with lua scripting. [t]http://i.imgur.com/9UJKxuB.png[/t] HNNNNNNNNG when i did barely anything and something pretty came out

[QUOTE=Tamschi;49463839]At least moderately, yes. Assuming you can indeed use your work computer privately for small bits of time, I recommend you start by reading freely available programming tutorials and/or documentation. I don't know much regarding resources for the "quick path" through existing engines, but I'm sure others here have a few recommendations. It's likely going to be quite some work to reach a level at which you're good enough though. With programming you can generally reach "it kind of works, but it crashes and runs slowly" fairly quickly but "it performs well and is good enough to sell" takes much more time for most people.[/QUOTE] Thank you! After the [I]everything is going to work and be perfect[/I] curtain fell off, i feel ̶v̶e̶r̶y̶ a bit ashamed of that thread and i really want to erase it, but i need to take the critique and rant. I'm the wrong one here, so i must improve instead of just feel bad...

[QUOTE=Rocket;49460811]yeah, they are. the compiler doesn't run any checks on your home-grown psuedoclasses like it does on classes in languages that have them.[/quote] Care to expand? Sorta lost you here. [QUOTE=Rocket;49460811]maybe at least define some of the results of common undefined behavior. what happens when there's an integer overflow in C#? well, depending on the project settings, it either throws an exception or just wraps around, unless you use the "checked" keyword. what happens when there's an integer overflow in C? "undefined behavior"[/QUOTE] You shouldn't be enforcing this unless you're 100% sure you do need it, and in this case you might just code the check yourself. Otherwise you're throwing resources away to fucking increment i from 0 to 10 lmao. [QUOTE=Rocket;49460811]a library should not be needed for something that should be a basic feature of any programming language in 2016.[/quote] Strings are always fucking retarded anyways, every implementation has one or another problem. [QUOTE=Rocket;49460811]because having a consistent type for bools makes interop easier and adds type safety.[/QUOTE] Maybe with some sort of dense array data structure that would've been swell, otherwise that's just wasteful crap to wrap my head around when I'm coding. Also there's stdbool.h you know. [QUOTE=Rocket;49460811]how big is an int? in C#, it's 32 bits, no matter the platform. in C, an int is 16 or 32 bits. what's the value of CHAR_BIT? hopefully 8, but if you're on some weird architectures it could be 9 or 16.[/quote] If you're on some weird architeture you're not going to use C# lmao. Also again, there's stdint.h definitions, ie int32_t, uint32_t... [QUOTE=Rocket;49460811][url=https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/s1ax56ch.aspx]these are the types that are passed-by-value in C#[/url]. you can pass a value type by reference using the "ref" keyword. everything else is passed as a reference. i don't see how direct memory access is a better system than this.[/QUOTE] I don't see any difference between passing by reference and pointers to be honest, the compiler will warn me if I'm doing something stupid unless I'm dumb enough to disable warning flags. GCC might be a piece of shit, but Clang's great in this regard, you should try it sometime. [QUOTE=Rocket;49460811]the requirement to use direct memory access for many C features (like using pointers for everything, or the terrible string handling) means that it's a lot easier to write security flaws. heartbleed wouldn't have happened in C#[/quote] And time-constrained servers would need a fuckton more of resources to do the same thing if we're talking about runtime analysis. If you're going the static analysis way there's always Clang/CPPCheck. [QUOTE=Rocket;49460811]ok, how about "all C compilers and IDEs that i have seen or used have bad debugging support."[/quote] A mixture of Eclipse and pure commandline GDB never failed me, it just took a while for me to stop being overwhelmed by the CLI nature of it. [QUOTE=Rocket;49460811]Strings[/quote] You're using the 'C' standard library anyways, so you -are- using a library for the strings, and nothing's stopping you from defining or downloading one to do it. It's all about being able to choose what's convienient. [QUOTE=Rocket;49460811]Assorted rants and ideas[/quote] You should choose the correct tool for the job, you're not going to skate on a hazmat suit or treat malaria patients in jeans, are you? C is a great tool and def. has it's strong points. [QUOTE=plutgamer;49461696]I think we should stop with the whole C war since it won't lead to anything (see Vim vs. Emacs).[/QUOTE] No, discussion is a great way to build insight and improve your tools and your trade if you're willing to give thought to what you're reading and writing instead of being blind and sticking to one side regardlessly. [QUOTE=plutgamer;49461696]scheme[/quote] I'd love to learn scheme, but it seems somewhat dead in the water, and it's a pain in the ass to google for information due to all the terribly different implementations. [QUOTE=plutgamer;49461696]Just thought I'd share my shitty opinion.[/QUOTE] Not shitty at all.

Anyone ever got into a case where their includes have somehow become this horrible mess and they aren't entirely sure how its currently messed up? Everything has header guards and yet either one of two files somehow get included again and it depends on the line they're on. If one file is below the other it becomes the issue and vice versa.

[QUOTE=darkrei9n;49464100]Anyone ever got into a case where their includes have somehow become this horrible mess and they aren't entirely sure how its currently messed up? Everything has header guards and yet either one of two files somehow get included again and it depends on the line they're on. If one file is below the other it becomes the issue and vice versa.[/QUOTE] Ctrl-f "#undef", also wrong thread there buddy. Also inspect your header guards. Headers are one of the C 'shitty designed' things imho. There's one thing that I fucking hate. [editline]5th January 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Rocket;49464110]i could address every point but i think it's more concise just to say that performance does not need to be your #1 goal in most uses in tyool 2016 and that a language that tells you when you fuckup is always better than one that does not[/QUOTE] That really depends on what you're doing, and again, there's cppcheck and clang, and they both do a pretty decent static analysis imho, even the latest gcc is pretty ok-ish if you're not going around disabling warnings everywhere.

People here often recommend ShareX for screen capturing, so I want to ask is there a way to disable the small preview pop up window (and sound) that appears in the bottom right corner after taking a screenshot ?

If C scaled for larger projects, we would still be using C. All of these discussions trying to justify what C doesn't have seem to me like comparing a toy shovel with an excavator. Yeah, sure, you can't really build a sand castle with an excavator while you can with a toy shovel. Writing 100 LoC C scripts is fine. Doing your for loops over arrays (that aren't even arrays) and your pointer arithmetic and your bit tricks. That's great. It's great for competitions in algorithmic programming (if you include the C++ STL which I guess already disqualifies C due to generic structures) because 100 LoC scripts is all you write. But for writing anything larger? Structuring a whole project in C? Come on. Operating systems are written in C because they were made 30 freakin' years ago. Not because C has some magical powers that make writing operating systems easy. C won't die for a long long time because it has the BIGGEST code base inertia of all the languages. Probably combined. COBOL isn't good for banking, FORTRAN isn't good for math. These languages are relics. Every good aspect of them has been extracted and refined and put into something sensible. I like C. I like writing those for loops and seeing how fast my computer can count to a billion. But the fact that performance is the only thing it's got going for it is not enough. It limits so many thoughts you can have when solving problems.

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/moBWrJa.png[/IMG] not sure about disabling the thumbnail in the corner

What do you guys think of when you think large projects though? A magnitude of at least tens of thousands of LOC or at least hundreds of thousands? [editline]5th January 2016[/editline] To me a project in the tens of thousands written in C is not really that big of a deal.

10,000 lines is nothing. The largest file I've seen in Frostbite is about 15,000 lines, and there are ~1,000 line files everywhere.

[QUOTE=Darwin226;49464368]If C scaled for larger projects, we would still be using C. All of these discussions trying to justify what C doesn't have seem to me like comparing a toy shovel with an excavator. Yeah, sure, you can't really build a sand castle with an excavator while you can with a toy shovel. [/QUOTE] I don't think C is especially bad for large projects, past a certain point the language starts mattering less and the actual architecture of the project starts mattering more, just look at big C projects like the linux kernel, freebsd, etc. The same things you apply in projects like those are often the same things applied in projects written in any other language. Things I can see causing real problems is the namespacing dilemma, and the fact that C's importing is just a textual include with some preprocessor cruft to stop multiple versions from being included. Don't go around with the whole toy shovel likeness though, it's just silly. I don't even particularly like C, but to say you can't build large things in C is just silly. Most often people like C because reasoning about what assembly is produced from any given C code is (normally) straightforward, though of course in the face of arcane optimizations and aliasing, all this can go to hell. (this is my favourite piece of horrible C code, it has to do with register allocation in GCC, often called the Satan of GCC: [url]https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/gcc/reload.c#L1165[/url]) .. note the 40 line if statement with embedded preprocessor ifdefs. Though I can see a bit what you mean with it not scaling too well for large projects vulnerability wise, since in C, vulnerabilities can come from the most innocent-looking piece of code in the most random places, which is not fantastic if you have a massive project people depend on (see browsers and the vulns caused by their use of C++).

[QUOTE=Profanwolf;49464542]Don't go around with the whole toy shovel likeness though, it's just silly. I don't even particularly like C, but to say you can't build large things in C is just silly.[/QUOTE] Hey, if someone can write RollerCoaster Tycoon in assembly then it goes without saying that you can write anything in anything. That was not at all what was implied here.

[QUOTE=Darwin226;49464616]Hey, if someone can write RollerCoaster Tycoon in assembly then it goes without saying that you can write anything in anything. That was not at all what was implied here.[/QUOTE] Well, what I'm saying you should provide some support for your arguments more than "it's a toy shovel". We won't get anywhere with these likenesses given no actual examples in C, or counterexamples in other languages.

[QUOTE=amcwatters;49464395]What do you guys think of when you think large projects though? A magnitude of at least tens of thousands of LOC or at least hundreds of thousands? [editline]5th January 2016[/editline] To me a project in the tens of thousands written in C is not really that big of a deal.[/QUOTE] A POS main sale screen that we maintain for a client is as of this moment 178,107 lines (this number doesn't include copy members). Remember that this is ACUCOBOL so it's not as line-efficient as more modern languages... A personal project of mine that generates PDFs that is written in C# hit 10000 lines a few weeks ago and its still pretty easy to maintain

[QUOTE=Rocket;49464110]i could address every point but i think it's more concise just to say that performance does not need to be your #1 goal in most uses in tyool 2016 and that a language that tells you when you fuckup is always better than one that does not[/QUOTE] Maybe that's the case for the sort of work that you do - but performance is vital still in huge swathes of the industry like telemetry and medicine and you'll find that a lot of the code that runs their equipment and systems is done in C because they can't afford the risk of sacrificing performance - and in those areas sacrificing performance can have some pretty serious implications and C is still king.

[QUOTE=Profanwolf;49464625]Well, what I'm saying you should provide some support for your arguments more than "it's a toy shovel". We won't get anywhere with these likenesses given no actual examples in C, or counterexamples in other languages.[/QUOTE] I have two arrays (or whatever collection, but let's say arrays because that's the only choice I can have in C) of items that represent something. I want to map a function over them. I want to concat them together. I want to filter out some elements. I want to do pretty much anything that I can do with actual first class values like numbers. But I can't. I have to allocate new arrays paying attention not the get the sizes wrong, then I have to iterate over my arrays with a for loop, paying attention not to reuse the same iterator or increment the wrong variable or anything like that and I have to manually do what I wanted to do. This isn't a problem if you have to do it once, but I have to do that EVERY time because there's no way to abstract over the idea. I want to do `filter g (map f (list1 ++ list2))`. And I want the result to be a new array. Or whatever, it can mutate whatever it wants. There's no way you can express this without having to bother with details that you simply do not care about. Want to write a generic data structure? Well, you better hope that by generic you mean "only ints". Otherwise you're in for a fun ride. Want to talk over the network? Open a window? Do a computation in parallel? You just have to talk to these state machines making sure you're as explicit as possible at every step of the way and obviously making sure you don't get your arguments wrong. The compiler won't help you since you're sending void pointers anyways. The language is completely uncompositional. The only two things that compose are if statements with function calls as conditions since everything returns error codes instead of actually useful values (because, of course, no exceptions). Writing C is like filling out forms.

I forgot to reply this one, woe is me! [QUOTE=Darwin226;49456702]You probably got dumbs because of the obvious provocation and the C# comment which you probably can't objectively defend. I bet there's a greater chance of an average C# project to work on multiple platforms than there's a chance that a C program written on Linux will work on Windows.[/QUOTE] Depends on what you're doing and how. I've fooled around with [pd|n]curses and SDL before and with some careful programming and a few changes it works just fine. If you're not doing platform dependent stuff or weird assumptions, then you're going to get very good portable code in C. In the case you are doing it, well, good luck abstracting things away. If you do it well you're getting pretty decent code out of it. [editline]6th January 2016[/editline] Again, a great example of this is the Linux kernel, it runs everywhere. [editline]6th January 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Rocket;49464861]the majority of programmers are not working on real-time systems or embedded systems[/QUOTE] Some are, and until Rust rises up to the challenge of being as fast and lean there's little competition.

[QUOTE=high;49462945] Aside from brain surgery, 2015 was pretty uneventful ([URL="http://i.imgur.com/97UQgle.png"]mri pre-op[/URL]).[/QUOTE] holy shit dude

:snip: merge broken by chained 'holy shits'.

Content: [img]http://i.imgur.com/39m1U1p.png[/img] [editline]5th January 2016[/editline] notably, cleaned up some packets and fixed desyncing

I'm making something, I guess. [thumb]http://gdurl.com/CdA0[/thumb] [thumb]http://gdurl.com/xRdZ[/thumb] [thumb]http://gdurl.com/PrQ5[/thumb] These are just screens of the debug room. It was supposed to look like some sort of early PS1 game, buuuut I got a little out of hand and did some extra stuff. I'm pretty awful at coding, but I'm hoping to get better!

[QUOTE=RelaxedCreepr;49465596]I'm making something, I guess. [thumb]http://gdurl.com/CdA0[/thumb [thumb]http://gdurl.com/xRdZ[/thumb [thumb]http://gdurl.com/PrQ5[/thumb These are just screens of the debug room. It was supposed to look like some sort of early PS1 game, buuuut I got a little out of hand and did some extra stuff. I'm pretty awful at coding, but I'm hoping to get better![/QUOTE] Make sure you get the "each vertex snapped to grid" effect for maximum nostalgia. I really like the combination of low-res and noisy ambient occlusion.

And alas, I can say I finished the last of my goals before starting my next uni term - a basic developer console. It isn't much yet, but my goal was to get a functional system in place before I stylize it. [vid]https://my.mixtape.moe/nxaqnd.mp4[/vid] This was the first time I ever had to deal with text input from scratch, so it was quite a learning experience. The command system is still in its infancy, but I'd say it is pretty efficient. There is still a lot more I wish to do with it, but the skeleton is now in place; muscle will be added later.

I'm considering doing another animation stream this coming afternoon around 2pm CST if anyone's interested. You can come see the love, care, and dedication that goes into making 94768304285 walk cycles and hating all of them. I'll be animating Dr. Glass and probably doing mostly driving/combat animations.

To risk adding my 26k lines of C++/opencl to this discussion: Spent two days updating the networking architecture of the shitty swordfighting game. Previously, all clients connected to every other client (yes really), and send udp packets informing them of the state of various things. This actually worked significantly better than you'd expect Now, there are lots of obvious problems with this. But the most troublesome is that its very difficult to define and join an in progress game - as its just an n^2 map of connections, there's not really a startpoint, and I certainly wasn't going to make it into a weird distributed graph tree thing So now I have a master server, and a game server. Game servers register themselves with the master server. Clients (the swordfighting game) can ping the master server automagically, and itll provide them with a list of the currently available game servers (all tcp). Then, the client will initiate a udp connection with the game server (currently just picks the first returned). The same networking style is used as before, but instead the client just pipes udp information to the game server, at which point it forwards it to the rest of the clients This works pretty great, only took me two days to (almost) entirely port across all the networking stuff (I was honestly estimating weeks), although I ran into quite a lot of varying issues with TCP/UDP along the way, mostly due to me not understanding that TCP is a stream based protocol, and that I forgot how UDP worked This is a picture [IMG]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9317774/networking2.PNG[/IMG] Here's one with 4 players in [IMG]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9317774/4p.PNG[/IMG] There's still a few minor kinks that I need to work out (heartbeating mainly), but it seems to work largely somehow. Surprisingly it only took me two days to do all of this, and completely rewrite all the networking code on the client I've also modified the capes that they're wearing to fall dramatically (or so I like to pretend) onto the ground after they die. Performance is also better as well now after some mostly accidental fixes (7ms/frame -> 5ms/frame), partly due to the networking scheme allowing dynamic character creation instead of just hiding the networked characters (not more 10 player limit!), and also due to some completely retarded per-frame bounding box calculations on the bodyparts for the cape physics (hooray, faster capes!)