Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
166
Announcements / Re: Happenings
« on: January 26, 2011, 06:13:07 am »
The school computer that I'm using uses eight cores (yes), even though it's really sluggish, and ENIGMA failed to run a really simple example due to prior errors. However, those prior errors were probably the extremely splendid program called F-secure being butthurt of ENIGMA doing things it shouldn't do, ohohoho!
167
Function Peer Review / Re: move_towards_point
« on: January 25, 2011, 04:54:29 am »Oh ok, that's good then. Shouldn't your version have been implemented already then?Yes, it should. Damn Josh >: |. But I guess you guys could do it better either way. I can program in ActionScript 3.0 and C# but I dunno if that's of any use.
168
Announcements / Re: Happenings
« on: January 25, 2011, 04:49:32 am »Yeah, mostly CPU. Memory's cheap, they say, and the GCC uses a shitload compared to the sleekest around (Clang, however incomplete). But yes, I notice a huge jump from single core to even just dual core. I don't notice much difference between dual and quad, though, so. I think there's an option for number of CPUs to use in the GCC, but I don't make use of it.Then do it already.
Anyway, downloaded r618, extracted, ran ENIGMA, got told that it found MinGW, so I clicked Yes, but it failed to do anything. So I uninstalled, removed the MinGW folder, and ran ENIGMA again, this time clicking No. A bunch of text appeared in the console, and then I thought it got stuck, but in actually, it was just taking forever to download MinGW.
This is what the console wrote during installation. Sorry for the wrapping. It's cmd.exe's fault. It probably took 15 minutes for ENIGMA to download MinGW. Maybe you should host MinGW in your Dropbox public folder, hehe.
Some specs (school computer, using that right now):
- OS: Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
- Processor: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU W3520 @ 2.67GHz
- RAM: 4 GB
169
Ideas and Design / Re: Extension API
« on: January 24, 2011, 10:30:15 am »
I was hoping I could give out functions to users without allowing them to see the source, kinda like a DLL, without being a DLL. This isn't possible or will not happen? And will these extensions be compatible with GM? *guesses no to both*
170
Function Peer Review / Re: move_towards_point
« on: January 24, 2011, 09:50:10 am »GML scripts allowed?
If they work when added as a function in Whitespace, or are really worth porting, I don't see why not.I already sent it to Josh but I'm not even sure he still has it.
172
Ideas and Design / Re: Extension API
« on: January 23, 2011, 07:04:08 am »
Will the extensions be compiled or protected in some proper manner? They would be really useful if so.
173
Function Peer Review / Re: collision_point
« on: January 23, 2011, 06:18:39 am »
I also di-- err, nevermind.
174
Ideas and Design / Re: Rooms versus Windows
« on: January 21, 2011, 06:12:48 pm »
What about keyboard_check_direct()?
176
Issues Help Desk / Re: Unit Formations In RTS
« on: January 21, 2011, 10:42:48 am »
I actually hate that kind of alignment in AoE2 with the villagers, but do as you please. Why not just add different options? For example, Warcraft 3 allows you to move everyone to the goal with their respective moving speed, or keep them aligned in a formation.
179
Proposals / Re: Shader effects
« on: January 13, 2011, 06:26:09 am »DirectX sometimes works better than OpenGL on Windows because Microsoft is fat and lazy.On a slightly related note:
180
Off-Topic / Re: Broken forums
« on: January 13, 2011, 06:22:57 am »
It's funny that there was a bug with distinguishing between C++ and GML because I've noticed the EDL tag being used several times, even though I've never seen any documentation of it.