Menu
▾
▴
gsg0-devel — GSG development discussion
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2003 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(8) |
Oct
(2) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(1) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: <ben...@id...> - 2004-05-25 09:41:26
|
Dear Open Source developer I am doing a research project on "Fun and Software Development" in which I kindly invite you to participate. You will find the online survey under http://fasd.ethz.ch/qsf/. The questionnaire consists of 53 questions and you will need about 15 minutes to complete it. With the FASD project (Fun and Software Development) we want to define the motivational significance of fun when software developers decide to engage in Open Source projects. What is special about our research project is that a similar survey is planned with software developers in commercial firms. This procedure allows the immediate comparison between the involved individuals and the conditions of production of these two development models. Thus we hope to obtain substantial new insights to the phenomenon of Open Source Development. With many thanks for your participation, Benno Luthiger PS: The results of the survey will be published under http://www.isu.unizh.ch/fuehrung/blprojects/FASD/. We have set up the mailing list fa...@we... for this study. Please see http://fasd.ethz.ch/qsf/mailinglist_en.html for registration to this mailing list. _______________________________________________________________________ Benno Luthiger Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich 8092 Zurich Mail: benno.luthiger(at)id.ethz.ch _______________________________________________________________________ |
|
From: <mr...@le...> - 2003-10-10 04:52:38
|
Well, all of my space-shooter experience comes from the original X-Wing and Wing Commander 4, both of which had different takes on this issue (for good reason). WC4 had a great plot (it was basically a movie, but a damn fun one), and used a waypoint system to separate different subsections of a mission. You would clear an area of bad guys, and proceed to the waypoint. X-Wing had one big battle, although it could take minutes to get from one part of it to another, you could always make it to any ship in the universe (given enough time). I tend to like the latter better, especially since it makes more sense for multiplayer games. To be honest, I'd prefer to stay away from light speed engines as a general instrument of combat (just as X-Wing did), because it would make the battle change much more rapidly, and would be too dynamic and unpredictable imo. Also, I've changed the mailing list options so that you can simply press reply and it will reply to the list. Quoting Tim Cunningham <tf...@Le...>: > (In case you can't tell, I'm sending out a few mails to the list about things > that I've been thinking about in an effort to try and get some conversation > going about them :) > > Okay, so this is about how far our in-game universe reaches. The thing about > space is that it's really huge... and that it's highly likely that two large > starships fighting would remain fairly far away from one another while their > little guys battled it out. So, my question for you guys is this: > > What are your thoughts and feelings on light-speed? Is it an allowable > strategy in-game to lightspeed past someone? Would it make sense to place > the two large ships far enough away from one another that non-light-speed > travel would take a signifigant amount of time? Would some sort of > limited-light-speed drive that acts as an extreme afterburner be acceptable? > -- > Tim Cunningham > > "I'm not claiming to be deep, I'm claiming to do it for fun." - Linus > Torvalds > ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ |
|
From: <mr...@le...> - 2003-10-10 04:42:23
|
Yeah, this sounds like a good solution to me. One thing I definitely recommend is looking at the source code to cross-platform projects such as BZFlag (http://www.bzflag.org/). I read through a lot of the bzflag code over the summer, and a lot of it makes sense. There are a lot of issues we can avoid reinventing the wheel on. Quoting Tim Cunningham <tf...@Le...>: > This is mostly addressed to Matt, but I hope we can get the whole ball > rolling on the list here. (I'm not sure who is even signed up, but I'm > hoping it's 4 of us, or at least 3). > > What I've found when writing CONTRAceptive is that the best way to do good > cross-platform support is to write a class that has a few initialization > routines that have big #ifdefs around them to see if you're in Windows or > Linux... they end up rendering fonts to displaylists, and then the display > list is just used generically in the rest of the class... At least, that's > the way I did it, and it seems to work well and be fairly clean. > > Anyway, this isn't a huge issue and I'm sure Matt can come up with an equally > compelling solution. > -- > Tim Cunningham > > "I'm not claiming to be deep, I'm claiming to do it for fun." - Linus > Torvalds > ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ |
|
From: Matt C. <mr...@Le...> - 2003-09-20 06:03:12
|
Response.. >>Can you declare variables, if so, how? For example if I have a global > 'x', the only way I can override it in a function is to have x be the >>name of a parameter. > > Not true; take my example below: > > function dostuff(y, z) > x = 5 > print x * 5 # Prints 25 > end function > x = 10 > dostuff(5, 10) > > Or were you saying that that is the way you'd like it to be? Not totally sure here. I either disagree with you here, or my statement wasn't clear. In your code sample, in my opinion, everything not inside a function is run right when that script file is opened. Things inside functions are saved for later parsing. Thus, when it sees x = 5, it's in context of the already defined x (=10) and not in context of the order in which they were declared. This it thinks that you're trying to set the global. This is part of the reason I'm afraid of having code outside of functions... the order that it's parsed and executed is muddled (from my view, though perhaps it's clear to you). >>Since there is no type for variables, concatenation should be an >>operator (either '.' or '&', I think) > > I support '.', personally. Me too. > Comments are preceded with # (is this okay?) and can be at the start of a line or at the end of one. That's fine >>Also, I think it should be possible to attach a string to each >>function describing it, so that in the console, you could do 'lsfunc' >>or something, and get: >>function1() - Does xyz >>function2() - Does abc >>I think it would be a neat thing to add (and optional, of course). > > Yeah, sure, I like this well enough.. maybe it looks for the line of comments immedietly preceding the function definition or something, but we can work that out. Yeah, that's what I was thinking |
|
From: Tim C. <tf...@le...> - 2003-09-20 05:34:46
|
Matt Casey <mr...@Le...> wrote: > Ok, a few reactions: > Can you declare variables, if so, how? For example if I have a global > 'x', the only way I can override it in a function is to have x be the > name of a parameter. Not true; take my example below: function dostuff(y, z) x = 5 print x * 5 # Prints 25 end function x = 10 dostuff(5, 10) Or were you saying that that is the way you'd like it to be? Not totally sure here. > There should be a warning if you ever read an uninitialized variable > before setting it. Okay, sure. > Some operators that I think you implied are included: ++ and --, <, >, > <=, >=, != or <>. Yeah, I forgot about them and I do want them. > Since there is no type for variables, concatenation should be an > operator (either '.' or '&', I think) I support '.', personally. > Strings are built with "", I assume. Good assumption. > Is there any support for arrays or vectors of any sort? Interesting question: I think I want vectors, but I'm not sure how to impliment it yet so I'm going to plead the 5th for the moment. I'll get back to it later. > How are comments made? Comments are preceded with # (is this okay?) and can be at the start of a line or at the end of one. > Also, I think it should be possible to attach a string to each > function describing it, so that in the console, you could do 'lsfunc' > or something, and get: > function1() - Does xyz > function2() - Does abc > I think it would be a neat thing to add (and optional, of course). Yeah, sure, I like this well enough.. maybe it looks for the line of comments immedietly preceding the function definition or something, but we can work that out. > We need to figure out how we're going to do events or callbacks, > because there might be some naming conflicts between functions and > variables. Well, I have a good idea on how I want to impliment this, but I'm really too tired to do it now; I'll write an e-mail about -that- tomorrow too. -- Tim Cunningham "I'm not claiming to be deep, I'm claiming to do it for fun." - Linus Torvalds |
|
From: Matt C. <mr...@Le...> - 2003-09-20 01:53:41
|
Whoops, watch out.. the reply function sends it to the sender, NOT the list. Forgot about that. |
|
From: Tim C. <tf...@le...> - 2003-09-19 20:12:38
|
This is a draft of the scripting language. Bounce ideas back. Statements end with a <cr> Variables are defined dynamically and are dynamically typed Types of variables: Float String Operators: Standard math (+ - * /) on floats Assignment, equivilance (=) Statements *Conditional if (condition) end if *Loops while (condition) end while for (a=0;a<5;a++) end for *Functions function name(parm1, parm2) end function *Calling Functions name(parm1, parm2) Only some commands are allowed in the console *Assignment *Calling a function Variables are either global or have scope local to the function they're created in. Commands are executed in order; functions are stored for future execution and any statement outside of a function is executed immedietly. Variables defined outside of any function become global variables, and a local variable by the same name will override them. (Have a way to reference the global one explicitly?) You can't define a function inside of another, although that would seem to be allowed at first glance. -- Tim Cunningham "I'm not claiming to be deep, I'm claiming to do it for fun." - Linus Torvalds |
|
From: Tim C. <tf...@le...> - 2003-09-19 20:12:04
|
(In case you can't tell, I'm sending out a few mails to the list about things that I've been thinking about in an effort to try and get some conversation going about them :) Okay, so this is about how far our in-game universe reaches. The thing about space is that it's really huge... and that it's highly likely that two large starships fighting would remain fairly far away from one another while their little guys battled it out. So, my question for you guys is this: What are your thoughts and feelings on light-speed? Is it an allowable strategy in-game to lightspeed past someone? Would it make sense to place the two large ships far enough away from one another that non-light-speed travel would take a signifigant amount of time? Would some sort of limited-light-speed drive that acts as an extreme afterburner be acceptable? -- Tim Cunningham "I'm not claiming to be deep, I'm claiming to do it for fun." - Linus Torvalds |
|
From: Matt C. <mr...@Le...> - 2003-09-19 20:11:59
|
This is a test of the gsg mailing list. -the 8 ball |
|
From: Tim C. <tf...@le...> - 2003-09-19 19:54:17
|
This is mostly addressed to Matt, but I hope we can get the whole ball rolling on the list here. (I'm not sure who is even signed up, but I'm hoping it's 4 of us, or at least 3). What I've found when writing CONTRAceptive is that the best way to do good cross-platform support is to write a class that has a few initialization routines that have big #ifdefs around them to see if you're in Windows or Linux... they end up rendering fonts to displaylists, and then the display list is just used generically in the rest of the class... At least, that's the way I did it, and it seems to work well and be fairly clean. Anyway, this isn't a huge issue and I'm sure Matt can come up with an equally compelling solution. -- Tim Cunningham "I'm not claiming to be deep, I'm claiming to do it for fun." - Linus Torvalds |
|
From: Tim C. <tf...@le...> - 2003-09-18 06:46:13
|
Here we go guys. :D -- Tim Cunningham "I'm not claiming to be deep, I'm claiming to do it for fun." - Linus Torvalds |
