Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

ANNOUNCE: HA! 0.1.6 released

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
April 27, 2005 3:39:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

and there was much rejoicing:

http://www.heroicadventure.com/dev/release/HA_016.zip

(ok perhaps not much rejoicing, but I'm pretty happy about it. It's been
nearly a year since 0.1.5c I think. Told ya it wasn't dead...)

What's new? Skills, Traps, Secret Doors, new monsters, etc.

IMO the game is too hard, but most of that will be mitigated once I add
more magic items and finish the code for missile weapons, wands and
spells. Currently there are no magical weapons or armor, just regular.

I've decided to try adhering to a quarterly release schedule. 0.1.7
should roll out around the beginning of August (maybe sooner).

Also, HA! now requires the 2.0 .NET Framework. Check the HA! readme file
for a link to the dotnetfx.exe file.

Yes I know... *insert MS related tirade here* but it's my platform of
choice. You can always go MONO (http://www.go-mono.com) if you want. No
I haven't tried HA! on MONO yet, since I don't currently have a Linux
box set up. (I've had a few distros over the years... Mandrake, RedHat
and Knoppix, but I keep going back to Windows... sorry)

Yes I know... HA! looks a fair amount like ADOM. That's because ADOM is
my favorite Roguelike, and I don't see any point in reinventing the
wheel if there's a look and feel I already like.

More about : announce released

April 29, 2005 12:36:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Heroic Adventure wrote:
> and there was much rejoicing:
>
> http://www.heroicadventure.com/dev/release/HA_016.zip
>
> (ok perhaps not much rejoicing, but I'm pretty happy about it. It's
been
> nearly a year since 0.1.5c I think. Told ya it wasn't dead...)
>
> What's new? Skills, Traps, Secret Doors, new monsters, etc.
>
> IMO the game is too hard, but most of that will be mitigated once I
add
> more magic items and finish the code for missile weapons, wands and
> spells. Currently there are no magical weapons or armor, just
regular.
>
> I've decided to try adhering to a quarterly release schedule. 0.1.7
> should roll out around the beginning of August (maybe sooner).
>
> Also, HA! now requires the 2.0 .NET Framework. Check the HA! readme
file
> for a link to the dotnetfx.exe file.
>
> Yes I know... *insert MS related tirade here* but it's my platform of

> choice. You can always go MONO (http://www.go-mono.com) if you want.
No
> I haven't tried HA! on MONO yet, since I don't currently have a Linux

> box set up. (I've had a few distros over the years... Mandrake,
RedHat
> and Knoppix, but I keep going back to Windows... sorry)
>
> Yes I know... HA! looks a fair amount like ADOM. That's because ADOM
is
> my favorite Roguelike, and I don't see any point in reinventing the
> wheel if there's a look and feel I already like.


So: has anyone tried "HA!" Is it cool, has it got good features?

A.
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 5:44:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Antoine wrote:
>
>
> So: has anyone tried "HA!" Is it cool, has it got good features?
>
> A.
>

I dunno if Davis Chord is lurking out there anywhere, but I've gotten
some great feedback from him/her. The biggest complaint is that the
game is too damn hard. (Early monsters too tough, traps occur too often,
that sort of thing.) I agree completely, and hope that a lot of the
balancing issues will go away as the feature set of the game progresses.
(Currently there is no spell or ranged combat in place, all weapons and
armor are nonmagical, etc...)

I also need to scale the difficulty of the monsters better. Currently,
HA! just throws new, tougher monsters as you go up in levels (and deeper
in the dungeons). I need to rework that to make existing monsters less
tough initially and get harder (slowly). Not too much though, because
the hero will be getting tougher as more things are implemented.

I also ripped out the system RNG and replaced it with a Mersenne
Twister, so it's entirely possible that could be affecting gameplay as
well. (More randomness = good, but original code was against system RNG,
so it's still possible to get unpredictable behaviors)

(sorry if this post is a dupe... T-bird froze up while sending)
Related resources
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 12:31:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Heroic Adventure wrote:
> I also ripped out the system RNG and replaced it with a Mersenne
> Twister, so it's entirely possible that could be affecting gameplay as
> well. (More randomness = good, but original code was against system RNG,
> so it's still possible to get unpredictable behaviors)
>
> (sorry if this post is a dupe... T-bird froze up while sending)

BTW -- I never wrote a word about HA!, so let me put here a few words --
I'm from the people who will never try HA!, because of .NET (or maybe if
I will be forced one day to install it for academic reasons). But I
would honestly like to see it, tough :-/
--
At your service,
Kornel Kisielewicz (charonATmagma-net.pl) [http://chaos.magma-net.pl]
"Shadows universe is non-heroic, unfair, cruel and designed to
start playing on your nerves and sanity." -- Anubis
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 12:31:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
> Heroic Adventure wrote:
>
>> I also ripped out the system RNG and replaced it with a Mersenne
>> Twister, so it's entirely possible that could be affecting gameplay as
>> well. (More randomness = good, but original code was against system RNG,
>> so it's still possible to get unpredictable behaviors)
>>
>> (sorry if this post is a dupe... T-bird froze up while sending)
>
>
> BTW -- I never wrote a word about HA!, so let me put here a few words --
> I'm from the people who will never try HA!, because of .NET (or maybe if
> I will be forced one day to install it for academic reasons). But I
> would honestly like to see it, tough :-/

If you ever get the chance to try it out, on your machine or someone
else's I look forward to your evaluation of it. (Do your school machines
have the .NET framework on them? Hmm... probably not 2.0 though...)

If I was a C++ programmer, none of this would be an issue. HA! would be
multiplatform and not require .NET. Sadly though I am not. I only had 1
semester of C++ in college, many years ago. I've thought of attempting
it anyway, but I don't think a complex roguelike is an ideal first (or
second) project for a C++ programmer. :) 

C.
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 2:39:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Heroic Adventure wrote:
> If you ever get the chance to try it out, on your machine or someone
> else's I look forward to your evaluation of it. (Do your school machines
> have the .NET framework on them? Hmm... probably not 2.0 though...)

I think one classroom might. Good point. Why did you switch to 2.0
anyway -- not enough reducing your potential audience by .net, also by
it's version (don't treat it as a critique, I'm just curious)?

> If I was a C++ programmer, none of this would be an issue. HA! would be
> multiplatform and not require .NET. Sadly though I am not. I only had 1
> semester of C++ in college, many years ago. I've thought of attempting
> it anyway, but I don't think a complex roguelike is an ideal first (or
> second) project for a C++ programmer. :) 

Well, y'know, there's always FreePascal ;-). And after I release
Valkyrie, it might be one of the best suited languages for roguelikes ;-D
--
At your service,
Kornel Kisielewicz (charonATmagma-net.pl) [http://chaos.magma-net.pl]
"Come on, Kornel. 11 years and no binary? And it's not
vapourware?" -- Mike Blackney
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 11:11:11 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
> Heroic Adventure wrote:
>
>> If you ever get the chance to try it out, on your machine or someone
>> else's I look forward to your evaluation of it. (Do your school
>> machines have the .NET framework on them? Hmm... probably not 2.0
>> though...)
>
>
> I think one classroom might. Good point. Why did you switch to 2.0
> anyway -- not enough reducing your potential audience by .net, also by
> it's version (don't treat it as a critique, I'm just curious)?

I was reluctant to switch initially, but the 2.0 Framework offers a few
enhancements over the original that made coding my RL much easier.
Specifically, they improved console support in a number of key areas. I
probably could have continued with the old version, but it's definitely
easier for me this way.

This probably won't come as a shock to most people, but I LIKE .net and
Microsoft. Do they have problems? Sure... of course they do, but I have
yet to encounter anything that doesn't to some degree.

I made a choice about 15 years ago to focus on a skillset that would
likely prove the most profitable for me careerwise, and Microsoft is it.
I make good money doing what I do, and I get to do HA! for fun. :) 

>> If I was a C++ programmer, none of this would be an issue. HA! would
>> be multiplatform and not require .NET. Sadly though I am not. I only
>> had 1 semester of C++ in college, many years ago. I've thought of
>> attempting it anyway, but I don't think a complex roguelike is an
>> ideal first (or second) project for a C++ programmer. :) 
>
>
> Well, y'know, there's always FreePascal ;-). And after I release
> Valkyrie, it might be one of the best suited languages for roguelikes ;-D

eek... I haven't coded in Pascal since High School (1987)
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 9:46:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Heroic Adventure wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>
>> Heroic Adventure wrote:
>>
>>> If you ever get the chance to try it out, on your machine or someone
>>> else's I look forward to your evaluation of it. (Do your school
>>> machines have the .NET framework on them? Hmm... probably not 2.0
>>> though...)
>>
>>
>>
>> I think one classroom might. Good point. Why did you switch to 2.0
>> anyway -- not enough reducing your potential audience by .net, also by
>> it's version (don't treat it as a critique, I'm just curious)?
>
>
> I was reluctant to switch initially, but the 2.0 Framework offers a few
> enhancements over the original that made coding my RL much easier.
> Specifically, they improved console support in a number of key areas. I
> probably could have continued with the old version, but it's definitely
> easier for me this way.

Duh, but was it worth the cost :-(.

> This probably won't come as a shock to most people, but I LIKE .net and
> Microsoft. Do they have problems? Sure... of course they do, but I have
> yet to encounter anything that doesn't to some degree.
> I made a choice about 15 years ago to focus on a skillset that would
> likely prove the most profitable for me careerwise, and Microsoft is it.
> I make good money doing what I do, and I get to do HA! for fun. :) 

I understand you want a language that is easy to program with. Never
though about other high-level languages? Ruby/Perl/Python are
ridiculously friendly to program with -- and are open to a lot bigger
group of people.

>> Well, y'know, there's always FreePascal ;-). And after I release
>> Valkyrie, it might be one of the best suited languages for roguelikes ;-D
>
> eek... I haven't coded in Pascal since High School (1987)

The Pascal that was available then, and the Pascal that is available
now, are two different things ;-)
--
At your service,
Kornel Kisielewicz (charonATmagma-net.pl) [http://chaos.magma-net.pl]
"If hackers will ever use virtual reality, it would show a bunch
of text terminals floating around them..." -- The Sheep
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 9:46:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
> I understand you want a language that is easy to program with. Never
> though about other high-level languages? Ruby/Perl/Python are
> ridiculously friendly to program with -- and are open to a lot bigger
> group of people.

PERL!? Are you mad?!

Try Java.

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 9:46:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
> Heroic Adventure wrote:
>
>> I was reluctant to switch initially, but the 2.0 Framework offers a
>> few enhancements over the original that made coding my RL much easier.
>> Specifically, they improved console support in a number of key areas.
>> I probably could have continued with the old version, but it's
>> definitely easier for me this way.
>
> Duh, but was it worth the cost :-(.

Please keep in mind, this community (R.G.R.*) is largely anti-MS, but
the primary community I consider myself a part of is very pro MS.
Finding people with the .NET Framework installed is not my biggest
challenge. (Explaining why ascii graphics are cool, is a hurdle
though... :)  )

>> This probably won't come as a shock to most people, but I LIKE .net
>> and Microsoft. Do they have problems? Sure... of course they do, but I
>> have yet to encounter anything that doesn't to some degree.
>> I made a choice about 15 years ago to focus on a skillset that would
>> likely prove the most profitable for me careerwise, and Microsoft is
>> it. I make good money doing what I do, and I get to do HA! for fun. :) 
>
> I understand you want a language that is easy to program with. Never
> though about other high-level languages? Ruby/Perl/Python are
> ridiculously friendly to program with -- and are open to a lot bigger
> group of people.

I haven't heard Perl and Python were all THAT friendly. I guess it all
depends on what you're used to.

>>
>> eek... I haven't coded in Pascal since High School (1987)
>
> The Pascal that was available then, and the Pascal that is available
> now, are two different things ;-)

That's a valid point.
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 9:46:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Twisted One wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>
>> I understand you want a language that is easy to program with. Never
>> though about other high-level languages? Ruby/Perl/Python are
>> ridiculously friendly to program with -- and are open to a lot bigger
>> group of people.
>
>
> PERL!? Are you mad?!
>
> Try Java.
>

I've coded some in Java, although not game stuff. I like my lang of
choice, though I have nothing against Java of course.
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 9:47:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Heroic Adventure wrote:
> Please keep in mind, this community (R.G.R.*) is largely anti-MS, but
> the primary community I consider myself a part of is very pro MS.

That community being? (Check all that apply)
[ ] Pandemonium [ ] Cocytus
[ ] Limbo [ ] Malebolge
[ ] Dis [ ] Tartarus
[ ] Gehenna

> I haven't heard Perl and Python were all THAT friendly. I guess it all
> depends on what you're used to.

Perl isn't.

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 11:15:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Twisted One wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>
>> I understand you want a language that is easy to program with. Never
>> though about other high-level languages? Ruby/Perl/Python are
>> ridiculously friendly to program with -- and are open to a lot bigger
>> group of people.
>
> PERL!? Are you mad?!

Well, Perl is a brilliant language for short tasks. And I saw at least
one roguelike written in Perl. But for me, Perl is the best
text-processing language. The GenRogue Parser is half generated by Perl
code ;-).

> Try Java.

To slow for me at least :-/

--
At your service,
Kornel Kisielewicz (charonATmagma-net.pl) [http://chaos.magma-net.pl]
"From what I've read, a lot of people believe that GenRogue
exists and will be released some day" -- Arxenia Xentrophore
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 11:15:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
> Twisted One wrote:
>
>> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>>
>>> I understand you want a language that is easy to program with. Never
>>> though about other high-level languages? Ruby/Perl/Python are
>>> ridiculously friendly to program with -- and are open to a lot bigger
>>> group of people.
>>
>> PERL!? Are you mad?!
>
> Well, Perl is a brilliant language for short tasks. And I saw at least
> one roguelike written in Perl. But for me, Perl is the best
> text-processing language. The GenRogue Parser is half generated by Perl
> code ;-).

Perl is a brilliant language if you a) want to make the source code
available but not actually usable by anyone, without the hassle of doing
extra work to obfuscate it and b) don't care about ever going back to it
to update/maintain it again. ;) 

>> Try Java.
>
> To slow for me at least :-/

Python is slower and you recommended that! Anyway, these are roguelikes
we're talking about here. A decently-written roguelike in C will run
acceptably fast on a 286, so a decently-written roguelike in Java or
even in Python will run acceptably fast on any reasonably modern
computer (say, manufactured after Dec. 31, 1994). ;) 

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 11:15:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Twisted One wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>
>> Twisted One wrote:
>>
>>> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>>>
>>>> I understand you want a language that is easy to program with. Never
>>>> though about other high-level languages? Ruby/Perl/Python are
>>>> ridiculously friendly to program with -- and are open to a lot
>>>> bigger group of people.
>>>
>>>
>>> PERL!? Are you mad?!
>>
>>
>> Well, Perl is a brilliant language for short tasks. And I saw at least
>> one roguelike written in Perl. But for me, Perl is the best
>> text-processing language. The GenRogue Parser is half generated by
>> Perl code ;-).
>
>
> Perl is a brilliant language if you a) want to make the source code
> available but not actually usable by anyone, without the hassle of doing
> extra work to obfuscate it and b) don't care about ever going back to it
> to update/maintain it again. ;) 

Programming languages are nothing more than tools to get the job done.
Certain tools are better suited to certain jobs. Perl, for example,
is outstanding when it comes to system administration, text
processing, and file manipulation. Also, it's very well suited for
the creation of CGI scripts. Using C/C++/Java for everything results
in a huge waste of time, if those languages aren't well suited to the
task at hand. Granted, Perl is probably a poor choice for a complete
roguelike, due to it's rather shaky graphics libraries, and a buggy
curses implementation.

But dismissing Perl as an altogether useless language is just silly
and wrong. The more languages you know, the better off you are, and
the quicker you can accomplish your present goal.


--
"There are of course many problems connected with life, of
which some of the most popular are `Why are people born?'
`Why do they die?' `Why do they spend so much of the
intervening time wearing digital watches?'"

-- The Book.
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 12:26:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Timothy Pruett wrote:
> Perl is a clean, simple language. It looks intimidating at first
> glance, but it's easy to read and write. Far easier than most
> languages.

Maybe if you have taken courses in Line Noise as a Second Language,
perhaps. :p 

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 12:27:47 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Heroic Adventure wrote:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>
>> Heroic Adventure wrote:
>>
>>> I was reluctant to switch initially, but the 2.0 Framework offers a
>>> few enhancements over the original that made coding my RL much
>>> easier. Specifically, they improved console support in a number of
>>> key areas. I probably could have continued with the old version, but
>>> it's definitely easier for me this way.
>>
>>
>> Duh, but was it worth the cost :-(.
>
>
> Please keep in mind, this community (R.G.R.*) is largely anti-MS, but
> the primary community I consider myself a part of is very pro MS.
> Finding people with the .NET Framework installed is not my biggest
> challenge. (Explaining why ascii graphics are cool, is a hurdle
> though... :)  )

Well, the problem isn't so much that a lot of people here are anti-MS,
it's just that a few of the more vocal individuals can't let one day
pass without some random MS-bashing. _Most_ of us, myself included,
can handle disliking something (MS) without feeling the need to
vocalize our opinion every ten seconds, and _most_ of us don't feel
the need to show open hostility to someone who feels differently.
It's unfortunate that a few people here have to express their constant
hatred of MS all the time. Restraint and tact are in short supply, I
guess.

>>> This probably won't come as a shock to most people, but I LIKE .net
>>> and Microsoft. Do they have problems? Sure... of course they do, but
>>> I have yet to encounter anything that doesn't to some degree.
>>> I made a choice about 15 years ago to focus on a skillset that would
>>> likely prove the most profitable for me careerwise, and Microsoft is
>>> it. I make good money doing what I do, and I get to do HA! for fun. :) 
>>
>>
>> I understand you want a language that is easy to program with. Never
>> though about other high-level languages? Ruby/Perl/Python are
>> ridiculously friendly to program with -- and are open to a lot bigger
>> group of people.
>
>
> I haven't heard Perl and Python were all THAT friendly. I guess it all
> depends on what you're used to.

It's all opinion-based, so the only way to find out is to dabble in
them yourself. _I_ find them easy, but just as many people will say
otherwise, so don't really listen to anyone's opinion on the subject.

>>> eek... I haven't coded in Pascal since High School (1987)
>>
>>
>> The Pascal that was available then, and the Pascal that is available
>> now, are two different things ;-)
>
>
> That's a valid point.


--
"There are of course many problems connected with life, of
which some of the most popular are `Why are people born?'
`Why do they die?' `Why do they spend so much of the
intervening time wearing digital watches?'"

-- The Book.
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 12:59:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz <kisielewicz@gazeta.pl>
wrote on Mon, 02 May 2005 19:15:51 +0200:
> Twisted One wrote:
>> Try Java.
> To slow for me at least :-/

Java is *not* slow, and hasn't been for over 6 years. It's generally
as fast as C and C++, sometimes faster when the HotSpot optimizer has
time to work. Like, say, in a heavy-processing AI or lighting function.

Do a speed comparison of equivalent code on your own and you'll see,
or check out <http://www.idiom.com/~zilla/Computer/javaCbenchmark.htm...;
and the linked benchmarks. This "Java is slow" meme is just bollocks.
It's like saying "Lamborghinis are pretty, but they're not fast"...

But it's also a peculiar thing to worry about. Even an interpreted
language like Peril or Python is usable for a roguelike on modern
hardware.

--
<a href="http://kuoi.asui.uidaho.edu/~kamikaze/"> Mark Hughes </a>
"Gibson and I dueled among blazing stacks of books for a while. [...] The
streets were crowded with his black-suited minions and I had to turn into a
swarm of locusts and fly back to Seattle." -Neal Stephenson, /. interview
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 12:59:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Mark 'Kamikaze' Hughes wrote:
> Do a speed comparison of equivalent code on your own and you'll see,
> or check out <http://www.idiom.com/~zilla/Computer/javaCbenchmark.htm...;
> and the linked benchmarks. This "Java is slow" meme is just bollocks.
> It's like saying "Lamborghinis are pretty, but they're not fast"...

The "Java is slow" meme is not just bollocks. It's just a lie of
omission. "Java is slow and bloated" would be more honest.

At least its runtime is only a meg or two download, not the 30+ with
extremely hostile EULA terms to accept of .NET.

I have occasion sometimes to use apps written in Java. These are, by and
large, network-oriented apps, and as such they are I/O and event driven,
rather than number-crunching or graphics-heavy or anything of that sort.
And what to my wondering eyes do I see in task manager if I launch one, but

Image name CPU VM size
javaw 99 105,385

This is on a machine with a 1.5GHz Athlon CPU and 1GB RAM. The CPU is
barely enough -- these Java apps still are prone to be sluggish and
unresponsive sometimes, and worse, they slow the whole machine down
intermittently. Even when javaw has its priority reduced to "Low". And
the memory bloat! Thank heavens for that Gig, or I'd be up to my ears in
molasses doing anything else with the machine at the same time. 100
megs. Throw on the 200 for WinXP booted up in any way other than "Safe
Mode (you can edit config files and play Solitaire but that's about it)"
and another 200 for assorted other apps, utilities, and so forth and
you'd be looking at major thrashing with only 512M in the machine.

By comparison, Internet Exploder uses only about 30M ram, and nearly
zero CPU with multiple downloads in progress and other continuing
network activity and heaview graphics usage. And that's a notorious
piece of inefficient Microsoft bloatware, not a real web browser.

Java seems to have been designed for use on a big Sparc cluster or
something. On an ordinary home-user machine its CPU saturation (and not
respecting its priority setting, somehow still preempting other tasks
when set to "low") is ridiculous. Mind you, I've sometimes seen a Java
task dip as low as just 20% CPU use when it was totally idle. Actually
touch the app's gui or have it receive some network traffic and it's
back up into the eighties or nineties at least, of course.

> But it's also a peculiar thing to worry about. Even an interpreted
> language like Peril or Python is usable for a roguelike on modern
> hardware.

*rofl*

Peril -- intentional or typo?

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 1:34:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Timothy Pruett wrote:
> Restraint and tact are in short supply, I guess.

What did you expect? This is Usenet!

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 1:45:46 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Paul Arthur wrote:
> And yet: my personal experience is the opposite of yours. I use a
> Pentium Pro desktop (200 MHz) with ~96MB RAM, and have virtually no
> problems with Java's speed.

Of course you don't -- since Java won't even successfully start with
less than 128MB RAM, you never find out how slow it is. ;) 

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 1:59:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Twisted One wrote:
> Perl is a brilliant language if you a) want to make the source code
> available but not actually usable by anyone, without the hassle of doing
> extra work to obfuscate it and b) don't care about ever going back to it
> to update/maintain it again. ;) 

Once again -- a Pascal programmer can write code in Perl, that's
perfectly readable for himself ;-)

>>> Try Java.
>>
>> To slow for me at least :-/
>
> Python is slower and you recommended that!

But it's a scripting language, with all the benefits ;-).
--
At your service,
Kornel Kisielewicz (charonATmagma-net.pl) [http://chaos.magma-net.pl]
Carceri -- A prelude to GenRogue... Coming Soon
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 1:59:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
> Once again -- a Pascal programmer can write code in Perl, that's
> perfectly readable for himself ;-)

And any idiot can do the same thing in Python and it'll be perfectly
readable by any idiot. :) 

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 2:24:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Twisted One <twisted0n3@gmail.invalid> wrote:

>Paul Arthur wrote:
>> And yet: my personal experience is the opposite of yours. I use a
>> Pentium Pro desktop (200 MHz) with ~96MB RAM, and have virtually no
>> problems with Java's speed.
>
>Of course you don't -- since Java won't even successfully start with
>less than 128MB RAM, you never find out how slow it is. ;) 

As I indicated above, my experience differs. In a case where we have
facts available, resorting to unsupported, inaccurate statements is
contraindicated.
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 2:46:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

In article <UJudnTSlxZGE6OvfRVn-oQ@adelphia.com>, Timothy Pruett <drakalor.tourist@gmail.com> wrote:
>task at hand. Granted, Perl is probably a poor choice for a complete
>roguelike, due to it's rather shaky graphics libraries,

Frozen Bubble?

Alan
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 2:53:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

twisted0n3@gmail.invalid wrote:
>Perl is a brilliant language if you a) want to make the source code
>available but not actually usable by anyone, without the hassle of doing
>extra work to obfuscate it and b) don't care about ever going back to it
>to update/maintain it again. ;) 

I've updated Perl scripts, well over six months after I wrote the
originals (nth law of software maintenance: If you last looked at the
code six months ago, someone else wrote it. That someone else might have
been the you that existed six months ago, but they're still someone
else.)

It wasn't even terribly painful.
--
Martin Read - my opinions are my own. share them if you wish.
My roguelike games page (including my BSD-licenced roguelike) can be found at:
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~mpread/roguelikes.ht...
Everyone expected the Bavarian Inquisition.
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 2:53:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Martin Read wrote:
> I've updated Perl scripts, well over six months after I wrote the
> originals (nth law of software maintenance: If you last looked at the
> code six months ago, someone else wrote it. That someone else might have
> been the you that existed six months ago, but they're still someone
> else.)
>
> It wasn't even terribly painful.

That's because of the mixture of weed, vodka, and Ibuprofen you used to
numb and psych yourself before the horrible, horrible task of touching
that awful perl code.

If it were me having to do that, I'm not sure what my choice of
anaesthetic would be. Codeine or morphine, injected directly into the
bloodstream, maybe. More likely, a bullet, and let someone else clean up
the mess ... and the blood and brain matter as well.

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 2:53:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Dnia Mon, 02 May 2005 18:00:11 -0400,
Twisted One napisal(a):

> Martin Read wrote:

> If it were me having to do that, I'm not sure what my choice of
> anaesthetic would be. Codeine or morphine, injected directly into the
> bloodstream, maybe. More likely, a bullet, and let someone else clean up
> the mess ... and the blood and brain matter as well.

Somebody give him some Perl code, quick! :]

Hm... Maybe if I put some perl one-liner in my attribution line, he won't
respond to my posts? :/ 

--
Radomir @**@_ Bee! .**._ .**._ .**._ .**._ zZ
`The Sheep' ('') 3 (..) 3 (..) 3 (..) 3 (--) 3
Dopieralski .vvVvVVVVVvVVVvVVVvVvVVvVvvVvVVVVVVvvVVvvVvvvvVVvVVvv.v.
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 2:59:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Paul Arthur wrote:
> Twisted One <twisted0n3@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>>Paul Arthur wrote:
>>
>>>And yet: my personal experience is the opposite of yours. I use a
>>>Pentium Pro desktop (200 MHz) with ~96MB RAM, and have virtually no
>>>problems with Java's speed.
>>
>>Of course you don't -- since Java won't even successfully start with
>>less than 128MB RAM, you never find out how slow it is. ;) 
>
>
> As I indicated above, my experience differs. In a case where we have
> facts available, resorting to unsupported, inaccurate statements is
> contraindicated.

I can't explain why two people with roughly similar machines would
have a different experience with Java. What kind of Java apps have
you ran on your machine? I'd be interested in doing a comparison, and
finding out why Java runs fine on your machine. I've never really had
speed issues, despite my low system specs, except when running
graphics intensive programs, and Java apps. Everything else runs
great, so I can't really figure out why the difference, unless you've
been running much smaller and less memory intensive programs than me.


--
"There are of course many problems connected with life, of
which some of the most popular are `Why are people born?'
`Why do they die?' `Why do they spend so much of the
intervening time wearing digital watches?'"

-- The Book.
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 3:32:26 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Mark 'Kamikaze' Hughes wrote:

> Kornel Kisielewicz <kisielewicz@gazeta.pl>
> wrote on Mon, 02 May 2005 19:15:51 +0200:
>> Twisted One wrote:
>>> Try Java.
>> To slow for me at least :-/
>
> Java is *not* slow, and hasn't been for over 6 years. It's generally
> as fast as C and C++, sometimes faster when the HotSpot optimizer has
> time to work. Like, say, in a heavy-processing AI or lighting function.
>
> Do a speed comparison of equivalent code on your own and you'll see,
> or check out <http://www.idiom.com/~zilla/Computer/javaCbenchmark.htm...;
> and the linked benchmarks. This "Java is slow" meme is just bollocks.
> It's like saying "Lamborghinis are pretty, but they're not fast"...

As usual, we get horrible arguments for why Java isn't slow. First, such
arguments only talk about purely numerical operations where the HotSpot
optimiser can work and where there is very little memory allocation going
on. So far, I agree that Java can be as fast as C for small numerical
operations. So far, nobody proved that the same can be said for huge
complex OO programs. Also, for some peculiar reason, all GUI programs in
Java I've used were annoyingly slow. And at last, the arguments in favor of
GC on that site are sooo wrong :) 

"With GC, a) the allocator doesn't need to look for memory, it knows where
it is"
IIRC, the mean complexity for douglea is O(1) it's *stupid* to say that
malloc based systems don't know where is the free memory

"b) the memory it returns is adjacent to the last bit of memory you
requested."

"The big benefit of GC is memory locality"
Guess what genius, modern malloc implementations are very good to preserve
memory locality.

Even better :
"b) the memory it returns is adjacent to the last bit of memory you
requested."
With douglea, the memory it returns as good chances to be taken in the last
memory bloc you freed because most of the time, that memory is already in
the cache. You can't do that with a GC because you never know when the
memory will be freed anyway, not counting the fact that most of the time,
you'll free memory blocks that haven't been in use for a long time and you
often risk pushing them in the cache when there is no need to do it.

"One rather dated (1993) example shows that missing the cache can be a big
cost: changing an array size in small C program from 1023 to 1024 results
in a slowdown of 17 times (not 17%). This is like switching from C to VB!"
And ? All languages have such issue. If the amount of memory you need for a
computation doesn't fit in the cache, you'll get bad performance no matter
what. And guess what ? All other languages would have probably seen bad
performances too !


Ok, that one is good to :
"perl was one of several programs that ran faster when converted to use a
garbage collector."
And so ? Perl is a garbage collected program ! Perl programs are writen to
take that into account and so there is nothing the VM can do to better
handle the memory than to let a GC do it. It's not like the Perl VM would
use a lot of allocation calls for the core VM code anyway and so, most
allocations are Perl objects.



So, "Java will be faster than C++" ? Maybe but prove it first. With a few
real life example of a non trivial application with a real usage of OO and
memory allocation ( ie, java quake doesn't apply here ) !

Just having to cast/type check all items you extract from a container is
enouth to reduce performances by a lot, not counting the boxing and
unboxing you have to do to place non object types in those containers :) 
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 8:56:26 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Christophe Cavalaria <chris.cavalaria@free.fr>
wrote on Mon, 02 May 2005 23:32:26 +0200:
> Mark 'Kamikaze' Hughes wrote:
>> Kornel Kisielewicz <kisielewicz@gazeta.pl>
>> wrote on Mon, 02 May 2005 19:15:51 +0200:
>>> Twisted One wrote:
>>>> Try Java.
>>> To slow for me at least :-/
>>
>> Java is *not* slow, and hasn't been for over 6 years. It's generally
>> as fast as C and C++, sometimes faster when the HotSpot optimizer has
>> time to work. Like, say, in a heavy-processing AI or lighting function.
>>
>> Do a speed comparison of equivalent code on your own and you'll see,
>> or check out <http://www.idiom.com/~zilla/Computer/javaCbenchmark.htm...;
>> and the linked benchmarks. This "Java is slow" meme is just bollocks.
>> It's like saying "Lamborghinis are pretty, but they're not fast"...
>
> As usual, we get horrible arguments for why Java isn't slow. First, such
> arguments only talk about purely numerical operations where the HotSpot
> optimiser can work and where there is very little memory allocation going
> on.

Not so. HotSpot optimizes all control flow, inlines function calls,
converts bytecode down to machine code, and optimizes memory usage. I/O
and graphics are all thin interfaces to native code. So the only place
it *can* be slow is in the algorithms, and the Java standard libraries
are well-designed.

> So far, I agree that Java can be as fast as C for small numerical
> operations. So far, nobody proved that the same can be said for huge
> complex OO programs. Also, for some peculiar reason, all GUI programs in
> Java I've used were annoyingly slow.

There's two answers to that. First, many programmers take the easy
way out and use Swing, which is very slow (especially on older JDKs),
but very capable. And in some cases that doesn't matter--I use Swing in
my GameScroll app because I wanted an HTML component, but it's just
interactive fiction, speed is irrelevant there. If you're running a
fast-updating Swing app on inadequate hardware, it'll be slow. I could
just as easily run an equivalent GTK+ app, and then claim that C is
slow.

Second, a competent Java programmer can get extremely good speed out
of the AWT. If your Java app is slow, it's because you don't know what
you're doing, and need to read a book (David Geary's <Graphic Java> is a
good choice, but it doesn't cover some of the later speed tricks). I
don't say that to be mean, it's just a fact. Java graphics should be
very close to bare-metal native graphics programming, and as fast as any
GUI library like GTK+ or Aqua. If they're not, then the programmer has
screwed up.

> And at last, the arguments in favor of
> GC on that site are sooo wrong :) 
> "With GC, a) the allocator doesn't need to look for memory, it knows where
> it is"
> IIRC, the mean complexity for douglea is O(1) it's *stupid* to say that
> malloc based systems don't know where is the free memory

Finding a large enough chunk of memory is a non-trivial problem; the
*best* case for both is equivalent, but worst-case for malloc/free has
long been known to be worse. This hasn't been debated by anyone inside
computer science for decades.

Oh, and speaking of Doug Lea, he's a Java developer these days. What
does he know that you don't?

> So, "Java will be faster than C++" ? Maybe but prove it first.

See the benchmarks linked from that page. Or any other java
benchmarks site you can find on the web. This is old news.

> With a few
> real life example of a non trivial application with a real usage of OO and
> memory allocation ( ie, java quake doesn't apply here ) !

Okay. Tomcat. There's a reason an absurdly large percentage of
business web sites are built in Tomcat (or another servlet container).
Static file serving is fast and calling servlets is fast.

Another: Azureus, the top BitTorrent client.

> Just having to cast/type check all items you extract from a container is
> enouth to reduce performances by a lot, not counting the boxing and
> unboxing you have to do to place non object types in those containers :) 

There's two problems with that complaint. First, that doesn't cost
much, or anything in most cases, and hasn't for many years--that's one
of the first things HotSpot optimized heavily, and in most cases the
very concept doesn't even *exist* in JDK 5.0.

But more importantly, why are you storing non-object types in
containers, anyway? If you need a resizable int container, you can make
a very fast and memory-conserving one yourself (yeah, how cruel,
expecting people to do a little work themselves, or at least spend 2
minutes with Google), but 99% of the time, you'd be better off storing
objects:

public class Terrain {
public static final Terrain CLEAR = new Terrain(0);
public static final Terrain WALL = new Terrain(1);
private int tile;
// and other fields
public Terrain(int tile) { this.tile = tile; }
public int getTile() { return tile; }
}

ArrayList list = new ArrayList();
list.add(Terrain.CLEAR);
list.add(Terrain.WALL);

And on the gripping hand, I write Java apps every day. Games on my
own time, performance-critical business apps when I'm paid. I say from
hard experience that Java isn't slow. People who don't write Java apps,
and haven't apparently looked at the language or used it in years think
otherwise. Who's more likely to be correct?

--
<a href="http://kuoi.asui.uidaho.edu/~kamikaze/"> Mark Hughes </a>
"Gibson and I dueled among blazing stacks of books for a while. [...] The
streets were crowded with his black-suited minions and I had to turn into a
swarm of locusts and fly back to Seattle." -Neal Stephenson, /. interview
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 9:03:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Heroic Adventure <spambucket@heroicadventure.com>
wrote on Mon, 02 May 2005 17:04:16 -0400:
> Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>> Heroic Adventure wrote:
>>> I was reluctant to switch initially, but the 2.0 Framework offers a
>>> few enhancements over the original that made coding my RL much easier.
>>> Specifically, they improved console support in a number of key areas.
>>> I probably could have continued with the old version, but it's
>>> definitely easier for me this way.
>> Duh, but was it worth the cost :-(.
> Please keep in mind, this community (R.G.R.*) is largely anti-MS, but
> the primary community I consider myself a part of is very pro MS.
> Finding people with the .NET Framework installed is not my biggest
> challenge. (Explaining why ascii graphics are cool, is a hurdle
> though... :)  )

This community isn't largely anti-MS. *Most of the world* is largely
anti-MS. There are very few people who actually think MS's products are
even marginally competent, and those tend to be people with little
experience of any other OS or software. Try telling anyone who's used
MacOS X or OpenOffice that MS products are worth touching. It is to
laugh.

The majority of people are just apathetic--they use whatever's in
front of them, which may well be a MS product, and get away from the
computer as fast as they can. But don't mistake that for them *liking*
the product.

--
<a href="http://kuoi.asui.uidaho.edu/~kamikaze/"> Mark Hughes </a>
"Gibson and I dueled among blazing stacks of books for a while. [...] The
streets were crowded with his black-suited minions and I had to turn into a
swarm of locusts and fly back to Seattle." -Neal Stephenson, /. interview
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 10:00:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Timothy Pruett wrote:
> I can't explain why two people with roughly similar machines would have
> a different experience with Java. What kind of Java apps have you ran
> on your machine? I'd be interested in doing a comparison, and finding
> out why Java runs fine on your machine. I've never really had speed
> issues, despite my low system specs, except when running graphics
> intensive programs, and Java apps. Everything else runs great, so I
> can't really figure out why the difference, unless you've been running
> much smaller and less memory intensive programs than me.

In this case, of course, "much smaller and less memory intensive" than
Hello, World, since even that seems to need a 400MHz CPU and about 50MB
RAM when coded in Java.

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 10:05:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Mark 'Kamikaze' Hughes wrote:
> Not so. HotSpot optimizes all control flow, inlines function calls,
> converts bytecode down to machine code, and optimizes memory usage. I/O
> and graphics are all thin interfaces to native code. So the only place
> it *can* be slow is in the algorithms, and the Java standard libraries
> are well-designed.

It can be slow in the VM and the GC, as well as the user-written code.
Bloated there too. And, evidently, it not merely can be; it is.

> There's two problems with that complaint. First, that doesn't cost
> much, or anything in most cases, and hasn't for many years--that's one
> of the first things HotSpot optimized heavily, and in most cases the
> very concept doesn't even *exist* in JDK 5.0.

There is no JDK 5.0. Perhaps it's 1.5.0 you were thinking of?

> And on the gripping hand, I write Java apps every day.

On the what?

> I say from hard experience that Java isn't slow. People who don't write
> Java apps, and haven't apparently looked at the language or used it in
> years think otherwise. Who's more likely to be correct?

People who use Java apps regularly but don't program in it? Programmers
are in love with their languages and therefore biased; and users notice
anything that's slow or doesn't work.

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 10:43:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Mark 'Kamikaze' Hughes wrote:
> Heroic Adventure <spambucket@heroicadventure.com>
> wrote on Mon, 02 May 2005 17:04:16 -0400:
>
>>Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
>>
>>>Heroic Adventure wrote:
>>>
>>>>I was reluctant to switch initially, but the 2.0 Framework offers a
>>>>few enhancements over the original that made coding my RL much easier.
>>>>Specifically, they improved console support in a number of key areas.
>>>>I probably could have continued with the old version, but it's
>>>>definitely easier for me this way.
>>>
>>>Duh, but was it worth the cost :-(.
>>
>>Please keep in mind, this community (R.G.R.*) is largely anti-MS, but
>>the primary community I consider myself a part of is very pro MS.
>>Finding people with the .NET Framework installed is not my biggest
>>challenge. (Explaining why ascii graphics are cool, is a hurdle
>>though... :)  )
>
>
> This community isn't largely anti-MS. *Most of the world* is largely
> anti-MS. There are very few people who actually think MS's products are
> even marginally competent, and those tend to be people with little
> experience of any other OS or software. Try telling anyone who's used
> MacOS X or OpenOffice that MS products are worth touching. It is to
> laugh.

I disagree. *Most of the world* is largely apathetic, it's a small
portion that are actually *anti-MS*. Besides, I've used Linux and MacOS.
I like windows just fine.

This is not a flame, but a serious question: Since people have a choice
of developing for a free, allegedly superior platform (linux) or an
allegedly inferior platform with tools they have to pay for (MS windows
- and Visual Studio is bloody expensive). Why do so many folks develop
for windows? I'm referring of course to professional developers,
releasing commercial software, not just hobbyists...



> The majority of people are just apathetic--they use whatever's in
> front of them, which may well be a MS product, and get away from the
> computer as fast as they can. But don't mistake that for them *liking*
> the product.
>

I think the majority of people in this world don't like *computers in
general* regardless of the OS. That's just the way it goes.
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 11:04:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Heroic Adventure wrote:
> now I know you're high... most prebuilt PCs do NOT come with MS Office
> for free. That's an expensive package. And before you go on another
> tirade, I've used productivity apps on other platforms. Mac and Linux.
> I'll stick to MS Office anyday.

Not because its stable or actually does more than pay lip service to the
expectation that one's software should actuall work, I'm sure -- just
because the user interface is decent. (Whereas the user interface for
Linux anything tends to be
hit-a-key-blindly-while-holding-three-metas-and-pray-you-remembered-it-right,
and the user interface for Mac anything tends to be pastel-colored
cartoony agony with no capability to do anything *other* than basic
productivity tasks, and heaven forbid any mere user actually try to
*program* anything...the UI seemingly geared towards kids, teenage
girls, homosexuals, blondes, graphic designers (and other people whose
job description includes "designer" and who lack Y chromosomes or hair
melanin), and the IQ-under-78 crowd.

> Also, WalMart sells laptops w/ Linux preloaded on them. I think it's
> Linspire 5.0 or something.

What for, joke gifts/April fools? (Certainly not actual productivity,
since you're lucky if Linux on a laptop can even successfully display
anything on the LCD screen, let alone actually do something useful with
the network card or any of the other hardware devices!)

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 1:35:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

"Christophe Cavalaria" <chris.cavalaria@free.fr> wrote in message
news:42769c6a$0$7933$636a15ce@news.free.fr...
> Mark 'Kamikaze' Hughes wrote:
>
>> Kornel Kisielewicz <kisielewicz@gazeta.pl>
>> wrote on Mon, 02 May 2005 19:15:51 +0200:
>>> Twisted One wrote:
>>>> Try Java.
>>> To slow for me at least :-/
>>
>> Java is *not* slow, and hasn't been for over 6 years. It's generally
>> as fast as C and C++, sometimes faster when the HotSpot optimizer has
>> time to work. Like, say, in a heavy-processing AI or lighting function.
>>
>> Do a speed comparison of equivalent code on your own and you'll see,
>> or check out <http://www.idiom.com/~zilla/Computer/javaCbenchmark.htm...;
>> and the linked benchmarks. This "Java is slow" meme is just bollocks.
>> It's like saying "Lamborghinis are pretty, but they're not fast"...
>
> As usual, we get horrible arguments for why Java isn't slow. First, such
> arguments only talk about purely numerical operations where the HotSpot
> optimiser can work and where there is very little memory allocation going
> on. So far, I agree that Java can be as fast as C for small numerical
> operations. So far, nobody proved that the same can be said for huge
> complex OO programs. Also, for some peculiar reason, all GUI programs in
> Java I've used were annoyingly slow. And at last, the arguments in favor
> of
> GC on that site are sooo wrong :) 
> [snip rebuttal]

I agree. I'll add some of that real world experience you wanted. We
wrote a rather large image manipulation program in java. The language
choice was a mistake. Image manipulation and the GUI in general was
sluggish even on a G5. The memory used (before we held the GCs hand and
fixed it) was over 1 gig.
To make the application runnable on a typical desktop machine we were
forced to profile the java code, take the pieces out which were the slowest
(image manipulation) then implement it in C with a JNI interface. The C
code was much faster.

Still, to my continued pain, I see a native C implementation which
accomplished the same thing as our mostly-java program, and runs in 20
seconds as opposed to 10 minutes. Ah well...

--
Glen
L:p yt E+++ T-- R+ P+++ D+ G+ F:*band !RL RLA-
W:AF Q+++ AI++ GFX++ SFX-- RN++++ PO--- !Hp Re-- S+
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 1:42:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Paul Murray wrote:
> I haven't looked for a while, so this is an honest question, not a set-up,
> but I do my hobby programming as well as my work in Visual Studio (6, can't
> see much benefit from VS.NET), because I feel it makes me more productive.
> In particular the intergrated debugger and the Edit-and-Continue recompile-
> running-code option. Is there an OSS alternative that offers this?

That's because Microsoft actually makes halfway decent user interfaces,
unlike Apple (too sappy) and open source (multiple Ph.D.s required to
make heads or tails of the UI). :) 

Actually there is one pseudo-open-source development environment with
edit-and-continue functionality and other nice graphical-IDE features.
You'll probably hate it though, because I refer to Squeak. (I'm unsure
how open source it really is -- the license sounds open for the most
part, but there's some weird stuff about fonts, and it seems to come
from Apple...)

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 2:25:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

<SNIP>
> This community isn't largely anti-MS. *Most of the world* is
largely
> anti-MS. There are very few people who actually think MS's products
are
> even marginally competent, and those tend to be people with little
> experience of any other OS or software. Try telling anyone who's
used
> MacOS X or OpenOffice that MS products are worth touching. It is to
> laugh.

Except that I _have_ to use MS Word to check my document made with Open
Office because of an extraneaous(sp?) newline at an inconvenient place
and a table that is not nicely ordered. If you want a job, better have
MS Word.

> The majority of people are just apathetic--they use whatever's in
> front of them, which may well be a MS product, and get away from the
> computer as fast as they can. But don't mistake that for them
*liking*
> the product.

I tried several times to hook my wife on OpenOffice but she doesnt like
it at all. I guess with enough braindamage to the computer brain lobe
you actually start to appreciate MS products.

Cheers,
T.

>
> --
> <a href="http://kuoi.asui.uidaho.edu/~kamikaze/"> Mark Hughes </a>
> "Gibson and I dueled among blazing stacks of books for a while. [...]
The
> streets were crowded with his black-suited minions and I had to turn
into a
> swarm of locusts and fly back to Seattle." -Neal Stephenson, /.
interview
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 3:04:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

twisted0n3@gmail.invalid wrote:
>That's because of the mixture of weed, vodka, and Ibuprofen you used to
>numb and psych yourself before the horrible, horrible task of touching
>that awful perl code.

Funnily enough, I was stone cold sober when I wrote the Perl scripts in
question, and stone cold sober when I recently updated them. But then,
being drunk at work is a bad idea.
--
Martin Read - my opinions are my own. share them if you wish.
My roguelike games page (including my BSD-licenced roguelike) can be found at:
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~mpread/roguelikes.ht...
Everyone expected the Bavarian Inquisition.
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 4:04:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Paul Murray <paul@murray.net> wrote:
>You say you are looking for work in IT, but hold the following views:
[list of Mr Anonymous's hates snipped]
>What exactly are you looking to do?

He could develop for some embedded platform whose manufacturer provides
GUI tools.
--
Martin Read - my opinions are my own. share them if you wish.
My roguelike games page (including my BSD-licenced roguelike) can be found at:
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~mpread/roguelikes.ht...
Everyone expected the Bavarian Inquisition.
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 4:51:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Quoting Paul Murray <paul@murray.net>:
[Of Paul Darbyshire]
>You say you are looking for work in IT, but hold the following views:
>- Anything made by Microsoft is evil and useless
> - There goes any Windows work
>- People who use commandline tools are idiots at risk of reformatting thier
>hard drives at any second
>- PERL is a completely useless language
> - There goes any Unix/Linux work
>What exactly are you looking to do?

Mac OS 9, I guess, or what SGI fondly imagine Irix admins do.

VMS is right out. :-)
--
David Damerell <damerell@chiark.greenend.org.uk> Distortion Field!
Today is First Tuesday, May.
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 4:51:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

In article <68l*VLDNq@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, David Damerell wrote:
> Quoting Paul Murray <paul@murray.net>:
> [Of Paul Darbyshire]
>>You say you are looking for work in IT, but hold the following views:
>>- Anything made by Microsoft is evil and useless
>> - There goes any Windows work
>>- People who use commandline tools are idiots at risk of reformatting thier
>>hard drives at any second
>>- PERL is a completely useless language
>> - There goes any Unix/Linux work
>>What exactly are you looking to do?
> Mac OS 9, I guess, or what SGI fondly imagine Irix admins do.

Not from the latest tirade:

"and the user interface for Mac anything tends to be pastel-colored
cartoony agony with no capability to do anything *other* than basic
productivity tasks, and heaven forbid any mere user actually try to
*program* anything...the UI seemingly geared towards kids, teenage
girls, homosexuals, blondes, graphic designers (and other people whose
job description includes "designer" and who lack Y chromosomes or hair
melanin), and the IQ-under-78 crowd."
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 6:05:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

In article <x76dnddam8c24urfRVn-pA@rogers.com>, Twisted One wrote:
> Paul Murray wrote:
>> I haven't looked for a while, so this is an honest question, not a set-up,
>> but I do my hobby programming as well as my work in Visual Studio (6, can't
>> see much benefit from VS.NET), because I feel it makes me more productive.
>> In particular the intergrated debugger and the Edit-and-Continue recompile-
>> running-code option. Is there an OSS alternative that offers this?
> That's because Microsoft actually makes halfway decent user interfaces,
> unlike Apple (too sappy) and open source (multiple Ph.D.s required to
> make heads or tails of the UI). :) 

I think the main problem is that while there is an abundance of programmers
willing to devote their time for free, there are very few graphic artists or
UI designers willing do do so.

> Actually there is one pseudo-open-source development environment with
> edit-and-continue functionality and other nice graphical-IDE features.
> You'll probably hate it though, because I refer to Squeak. (I'm unsure
> how open source it really is -- the license sounds open for the most
> part, but there's some weird stuff about fonts, and it seems to come
> from Apple...)

Looks quite neat, but not neat enough to switch from C++ to Smalltalk :) 
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 6:05:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Paul Murray wrote:
>>Actually there is one pseudo-open-source development environment with
>>edit-and-continue functionality and other nice graphical-IDE features.
>>You'll probably hate it though, because I refer to Squeak. (I'm unsure
>>how open source it really is -- the license sounds open for the most
>>part, but there's some weird stuff about fonts, and it seems to come
>>from Apple...)
>
> Looks quite neat, but not neat enough to switch from C++ to Smalltalk :) 

Hrm.

(3 + 5 * 2) = 13 ifFalse: [Transcript show: 'This language was clearly
not designed by or for mathematicians!']

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 9:10:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Twisted One wrote:
> Heroic Adventure wrote:
>
>> Also, WalMart sells laptops w/ Linux preloaded on them. I think it's
>> Linspire 5.0 or something.
>
>
> What for, joke gifts/April fools? (Certainly not actual productivity,
> since you're lucky if Linux on a laptop can even successfully display
> anything on the LCD screen, let alone actually do something useful with
> the network card or any of the other hardware devices!)
>

*plonk*

You can't argue BOTH sides of the argument. You are now dead to me.
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 1:19:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
*SNIP*
> But it's a scripting language, with all the benefits ;-).

Not trying to be cute, but what are the advantages
of a scripting language in your view Korn?

> Carceri -- A prelude to GenRogue... Coming Soon

Please explain!

--
ABCGi ---- (abcgi@yahoo.com) ---- http://codemonkey.sunsite.dk
Fun RLs in rgrd that I have tested recently!
DoomRL - DwellerMobile - HWorld - AburaTan - DiabloRL
Heroic Adventure - Tower of Doom - Shuruppak - TheTombs
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 1:19:42 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

ABCGi wrote:
> Not trying to be cute, but what are the advantages
> of a scripting language in your view Korn?

Rapid prototyping I suppose -- and extensible/scriptable pretty much for
free.

--
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Palladium? Trusted Computing? DRM? Microsoft? Sauron.
"One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them."
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 6:21:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Paul Murray <paul@murray.net>
wrote on Tue, 03 May 2005 12:03:26 GMT:
> I haven't looked for a while, so this is an honest question, not a set-up,
> but I do my hobby programming as well as my work in Visual Studio (6, can't
> see much benefit from VS.NET), because I feel it makes me more productive.
> In particular the intergrated debugger and the Edit-and-Continue recompile-
> running-code option. Is there an OSS alternative that offers this?
> All this religious fervour over software seems pretty silly. Use the best
> tool available for the job. For file and text handling I find that to be
> cygwin, for programming I find it to be VS.

For Java (and with the right plug-ins C++, Python, and other
languages), Eclipse <http://eclipse.org/&gt; is the best IDE I've ever
seen. It autocompiles code as you work, has the best refactoring tools
outside of IDEA (which isn't much of an IDE aside from the refactoring
tools), has excellent CVS and Subversion integration, and has a very
powerful user interface design. You have multiple views, either
standard ones or custom ones, which collect a layout of internal windows
for various tasks. So if you're in the editing view, you have a big
source editor, the project hierarchy, console and error panes, etc. If
you're in the debug view, you have a small source editor, a big
debugger, a variable browser, etc. It's incredibly convenient.

There are others. KDevelop for C/C++ on Linux. Mac has a standard
IDE for Java and Objective C. Borland's JDeveloper is excellent, but
the good versions cost money and it's not quite up to Eclipse's level;
Delphi/Kylix is a better Visual Basic than VB ever was; I don't follow
their C/C++ tools at all, but presumably they're as good as they ever
were.

There's nothing particularly unusual about VS, it's a mediocre IDE
with no refactoring tools and poor source control integration (no,
"Visual Source Safe" is not source control, it's a garbage can for your
code--it's one of MS's most incompetent products ever, and that's saying
something).

--
<a href="http://kuoi.asui.uidaho.edu/~kamikaze/"> Mark Hughes </a>
"Gibson and I dueled among blazing stacks of books for a while. [...] The
streets were crowded with his black-suited minions and I had to turn into a
swarm of locusts and fly back to Seattle." -Neal Stephenson, /. interview
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 8:57:00 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

konijn_ wrote:
> <SNIP>
>
>> This community isn't largely anti-MS. *Most of the world* is
> largely
>>anti-MS. There are very few people who actually think MS's products
> are
>>even marginally competent, and those tend to be people with little
>>experience of any other OS or software. Try telling anyone who's
> used
>>MacOS X or OpenOffice that MS products are worth touching. It is to
>>laugh.
>
> Except that I _have_ to use MS Word to check my document made with Open
> Office because of an extraneaous(sp?) newline at an inconvenient place
> and a table that is not nicely ordered. If you want a job, better have
> MS Word.

It would not surprise me to learn that this is
somehow the fault of MS... but here is the solution;

When using open office use their format sxw etc
(as it quite strongly suggests you do every time
you try and save!). Anyway never trust the look of
anything until its into a PDF!

>> The majority of people are just apathetic--they use whatever's in
>>front of them, which may well be a MS product, and get away from the
>>computer as fast as they can. But don't mistake that for them
> *liking*
>>the product.
>
> I tried several times to hook my wife on OpenOffice but she doesnt like
> it at all. I guess with enough braindamage to the computer brain lobe
> you actually start to appreciate MS products.

Are you forgetting the relationship/advice axiom? ;) 

--
ABCGi ---- (abcgi@yahoo.com) ---- http://codemonkey.sunsite.dk
Fun RLs in rgrd that I have tested recently!
DoomRL - DwellerMobile - HWorld - AburaTan - DiabloRL
Heroic Adventure - Tower of Doom - Shuruppak - TheTombs
!