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.


Messages - Josh @ Dreamland

466
Programming Help / Re: Using external resources (loading/unloading)
« on: February 01, 2014, 02:15:26 AM »
You might be interested in reading my remarks on the matter from the Wiki To-do page. I'd consider .pak files to be a viable bundling mechanism.

You can easily call 7zip using execute_shell. If that function is not implemented, you can instead use C++'s system() function, which is a bit hacky, but viable. Using 7zip externally, however, will cost you additional disk operations, so I wouldn't personally recommend it.

467
Developing ENIGMA / Re: Window Alpha and Message Box
« on: February 01, 2014, 12:27:04 AM »
...

(1) ISO RGB does not concern alpha. Maybe you meant to quote something from ISO that includes the letter "A" or specifically mentions phrases such as "alpha" or "opacity."
(2) We are in no way obligated to follow ISO on matters not related to our working set. The only standards we answer to are C++ (which they govern) and, here, Win32 (which they do not).

Win32 uses a byte, and that's a reason to prefer it ceteris paribus. Except for a few functions Yoyo has introduced in the last year, all of GM's functions which deal with opacity accept floats—even where all other attributes are unsigned byte.

I'm not opposed to the switch, but I'll be damned if I'm going to stand by and pretend it's anything but a switch. And if other members are opposed, that is a consideration.

Moreover, Game Maker never used ARGB. It has always been BGR internally and RGB in function notation. ENIGMA added a layer atop that which works with RGBA, which is more common. Their propensity to break existing traditions isn't a concern of mine—I assign it virtually no weight.

468
Developing ENIGMA / Re: Window Alpha and Message Box
« on: January 31, 2014, 02:55:28 PM »
The point here is consistency. If the windows function you are using accepts a byte, then fine, but otherwise, there is no point to breaking the trend.

A blue ball icon is easy. Issue is, without the white E, it looks like this:



Conventionally, engines are represented with a gear. But it's not very flattering; it looks like this:



If you're feeling fancy, I'd recommend something more like this:



And if you insist on the icon being a controller, at least use something like this:

   /   

469
Developing ENIGMA / Re: Window Alpha and Message Box
« on: January 31, 2014, 10:17:24 AM »
Regarding alpha:
I don't care how you feel about using a float for alpha. If you don't use a float, you're wasting three bytes of alignment, anyway.

Regarding the controller icon:
Even worse. I don't care what you make the icon; don't make it anything that even remotely implies we are supporting a brand. Especially not that brand. The icon I made that was nothing but circles reminded you of .NET, so you replaced it with a goddamn XBox controller. Let me tell you, the XBox reminds of of .NET.

470
Developing ENIGMA / Re: Window Alpha and Message Box
« on: January 31, 2014, 08:47:33 AM »
Not bad. Conventionally, alpha is a float. And why is the game icon a sixaxis controller?

471
Works in Progress / Re: Dungeon Blabber
« on: January 28, 2014, 11:09:34 AM »
Have you considered just rendering a few of your models in that contrast? You seem to be attached to the way it makes some things look, while ignoring the fact that other objects into unrecognizable meshes of light black and white. The final render you posted looks beautiful; the two before it can't be understood visually. The skulls in particular look good with the high contrast, as it brings out the texture.

472
C++ code is always generated, and can be sent to any compiler. You won't want to edit the generated code; it is not pretty.

The compilers the code can be sent to are listed under Compilers/PLATFORM/*.ey. If you like, you can create a new one for a different compiler. You can then select your preferred compiler from Enigma Settings, under the API tab.

473
Issues Help Desk / Re: There was an issue loading the project
« on: January 25, 2014, 04:36:23 PM »
If creating a duplicate object manually fixes the problem, then there's likely an issue in the code LGM is sending ENIGMA. So there's an invisible problem in the code that was imported.

474
I see you telling him too much contrast is "terrible," but aside from that I really don't see any aggression. He did, on another post in this board, ask you to stop replying to him, which isn't exactly polite, but falls quite short of this outright flame war you are trying to brew. You aren't going to get along with everyone you meet; that isn't justification for starting a topic dedicated to bashing them pointlessly.

475
The only one calling anyone else names is you, Jimmy. I don't care if you think he's done something to deserve you openly flaming him; it reflects poorly on you. I'd recommend for both of your sakes that you not do so.

476
Jimmy, don't be an ass. It does not behoove you. And in general, it isn't very flattering.

477
General ENIGMA / Re: HTML5 based IDE
« on: January 22, 2014, 10:17:03 AM »
A static page is doable; JDI can generate that, no sweat.

As for Bison... you might be better off just emscripten'ing the piece of the compiler that actually builds the AST. If that succeeds, the code at least checks out from a context-free perspective.

I think a good approach to those server models is to code the libraries as though they are to be used natively (ie, application→library), then instead, code a new library that calls a remote application to work with them (application→networking library → server application→library), so that the actual code for the file and ENIGMA server isn't actually aware it's ever remote.

Also, keep plans for multiple ENIGMA servers at heart—if a server is doing the compiling, there's no reason not to have a farm of (virtual) servers running each OS. That way you can build for all, on-demand.

478
General ENIGMA / Re: Linking Exception Draft
« on: January 22, 2014, 09:55:03 AM »
I would rather any holes be on the users' side. We can always grant new rights; we can never take rights away. And including a clause that says, "we reserve the right to retroactively cancel this exception" would not bode well. So the idea is, fortify the hell out of the exception, then grant additional rights as they become required.

I wouldn't worry about (4). The GPL grants users the ability to use code internally however they like. As long as GPL code never leaves your machine, you can use it in proprietary applications to your heart's content. I trust this idea applies to corporate entities, too. You can modify GPL code in any way you like, as long as you're doing so on your own machine; it only becomes a problem for you once you try distributing it. So as long as their engine obeys the other terms, when they link the game for stand-alone release, it will be fine.

Your concern for (5), however, is definitely legitimate. What was meant when that was written was clear, I hope, but you are definitely right; the phrase intended for linking into other software applications is saying too much, as Android itself is still "another software application." I will have to re-phrase that, or get a lawyer's help in doing so. I will give it some thought over the next day or so; I don't want to jump the gun on it.

But like I said, all we need to fix a concern on a user's part is consent from the contributors to tweak the license. All we need to fix a concern on the project's part is an act of God. So I'm tending toward not giving users all necessary clearance. I'm glad to have someone who is defending from the users' perspective, because I find it harder to put myself in that position. :)

479
Developing ENIGMA / Re: Style guidelines
« on: January 22, 2014, 12:57:03 AM »
For objective articles, yes, but a huge portion of the Wiki is opinions, personalized instructions, and tutorials. In those situations, there's no point to trying to formalize everything; you're there to listen to what someone has to say.

480
I have already bothered to address the actual points you brought up, elsewhere on these forums. You seem to be under the impression that you had brought up more than that, and so I'll address a couple of the statements you may have mistaken for points here, as well. For instance, you seemed displeased with the behavior of the developers.

ENIGMA's developer base is not a coherent entity. No one is paid for their work, here. Everyone is expendable, without exception. We are not a company, and these contributors do not represent a company in any way. If you have a problem with one or more developers, that is not to do with this project.

Moreover, contributors are free, here, to share their opinions. This includes opinions that are not founded, not publicly founded, or even downright incorrect. In this country, and on this forum, they are protected in doing so by their freedom of speech. While it is the right of the forum administrators to suppress this, we do not make a habit of doing so. Unlike, I will point out, Yoyo Games. Mentioning competing software on that site, especially in a positive light, is prohibited. Users who do so will have their posts deleted, and will be banned on repeated offense. Meanwhile, we left all twelve of your very rude, often distracting posts up, in the hopes that most of our readers are mature enough to ignore them. Quite a stark contrast, but not really material to this argument.

I usually dislike dabbling in outright fallacy, but while we're on the ad-hominem train, I'll point out that many on the Yoyo staff, including forum staff and developers alike, are quite quick to bash this project when it it mentioned. I bring this up to remind you that in a corporate environment, employees do represent their respective companies when they speak. As paid "professionals," you should hold them to a higher standard than you hold contributors to a free software project. But it is fine by me that you choose not to; just don't expect warm reception for an ad hominem.


Now, on to the points of substance (the things you said which were not informal fallacies).


You mentioned that you were displeased with ENIGMA's lack of updates.

ENIGMA has a constant flow of updates. That's actually part of its problem. ENIGMA does not have a formal release schedule. This is to do with the fact that it does not have a formal development team. Instead, ENIGMA has what are basically rolling releases. It may seem broken and rag-tag, but it all comes down to the simple fact that we don't tag git revisions as stable. Many larger projects do so, and then commit only bug fixes to the tags for some length of time. We do not. While there's no profound reason we do not, there is still a reason: no one wants to do that, and no one is getting paid to do that. Solve either of those, and we're golden.


You mentioned that no one has ever made a large game in ENIGMA.

You don't know that, and we don't know that. ENIGMA does not have a marketing team. We don't strive to make our engine look artificially popular. We don't take people's work that is not ours, put it up on a pedestal and say, "LOOK WHAT WE CAN DO!" The EDC has a good selection of games which were made in Game Maker and happen to work in ENIGMA. It also has a good collection of games which were made in ENIGMA, and happen to still work in ENIGMA (this being the far rarer occurrence). The source is included for all of these games. At no point do we shove any of these in anyone's face for the sole purpose of marketing.

TGMG has, however, recently decided to sponsor a game development contest. This isn't to do with your whining so much as a lucky coincidence; you may yet see the artificial popularity charade you seem to crave.


You mentioned that our documentation can't be downloaded.

No one has automated anything to crawl the Wiki and export pages. That isn't to say it won't happen, just that it has not happened. Once again, the lack of developer interest or subsidization thereof is at issue. It really isn't a big to-do item, though there has been interest in the topic (both from Robert and from various users). In fact, Robert has apparently already worked out a system for downloading pieces of the wiki for offline use. So apparently he is interested in the prospect; now you just have to find a couple more people who feel the same way.


Lastly, you mentioned that our licensing was not worked out.

This one, we actually intend to correct, even though it is not our responsibility to do so. I would be content to mandate all ENIGMA games be free, but of the sake of the users, am consenting to a license which gives users autonomy over the license of their own executables. The other contributors are also inclined to do so. This problem, largely catalyzed by you, is being addressed in another topic, and you are welcomed to weigh in. I would request that you do so calmly and with the understanding that ENIGMA, while free, is still the intellectual property of its contributors, each of whom holds the prerogative to maintain the restrictions of the GNU General Public License on his or her code indefinitely.


And let me emphasize once more that it does not matter who you are, or who I am, or who any other contributor is. A point is a point, and they are handled or ignored as such, regardless of the speaker or his or her intentions.