Jan 8 2003, 2:54 pm
In response to Spuzzum
|
|
Exadv1
 |
Also icon.Blend(icon2,ICON_OVERLAY) is critical to implementation.
|
Which is the same answer I'd give you regarding both your statements, 'why should I release libraries' and 'why is a library is preferable'. =P
| |
I don't think libraries will help people learn, so I won't make libraries. All the things I've written that I could make a lib out of are each under 3 hours work, and under 250 lines.
| |
You don't want to distribute source code because you think people will steal your source code, BUT you won't release libraries (which by definition has to be source code) because you think they won't help people learn?
Is it just me, or is there a conflict between these two statements? | |
OneFishDown wrote:
Is it better to teach someone how to write a pathfinding routine or to give them one? Common misunderstanding of the benefits of libraries. Fortunately the gaming industry is moving away from this stereotype. There is no need to re-invent the wheel. If I went to my boss and said "There's an industry-standard XML parsing library we can use for free, but instead I'm going to spend the company's time and money writing my own", I'd get fired, and rightfully so. See my article on the subject. | |
I am using common sense. Speaking of which, did you build your own computer? If you did, then did you make your own chips, motherboard, processor, etc? Shouldn't you have done that, and instead be yelling at the outrageous companies like Dell, who are selling PRE-MADE PCs to people, isntead of telling them to make their own? I mean, people learn nothing from that! And they could take the PC and call it their own!
| |
OneFishDown wrote:
I could explain to someone how to make a pathfinding routine in under a half an hour. How long would it take you to write and debug a general purpose fully-functioning pathfinding library? How long would it take the person you are telling? Oh, and now could you make it work for multi-tile mobs too? How long would it take you to write a fully-functioning character customization, loading and saving library? How long would it take you to write a fully-functioning and tested Calendar library? (Don't forget to take leap years into account!) How long would it take you to write a fully-functioning and tested regular expression engine? How long would it take you to write a general-purpose encryption engine? You are free to spend weeks or months reinventing all the wheels. Most people are here to make games, not to have to learn the details of A* pathing algorithms and 128 bit RSA encryption. Why should someone who just wants to make a game have to research, write, and debug 20 libraries that other people have already created just so they can make a game? | |
My statement applied to code, and libraries. When you use a statement out of context, it can sound wrong, which would be why I apllied it to code.
| |
What it comes down to is the fact that I don't like libraries. Libraries should save you time. If you know how to make the wheel, you shouldn't have to re-invent it. If someone uses 20 libraries and doesn't understand them, did they make the game?
I write nearly all the code for my games, that's just the way I work. Why should I re-write an A* pathfinding routine when I could make my own just-as-good pathing routine in an hour or two? When I am done making a game, I like to be able to say that I made it. There are so many libraries and demos available here that someone could slap a few together and make a "game". It would take me a short time to tell someone how a tile-based pathfinding routine works. I cannot control whether or not they understand it. As for all those "how long would it take you to..." questions of yours: I'll cross those bridges when I come to them. When I need one of them I'll find out how long it takes me to make. I don't use libraries. If I can't do it myself, then I should learn how. I am not re-inventing the wheel. (expanding on the wheel metaphor) Your wheel doesn't necessarily fit my car. I know what kind of wheel I want, so I'll make it myself. Deadron, I hope you haven't taken offense to anything I've said, because I probably didn't mean it to be offensive if it seemed that way. It's the way I program. If I am re-inventing the wheel, so be it. I am learning from it. Should I re-invent the wheel and learn, or just steal someone else's wheel? That is the way I program, so deal with it. | |
OneFishDown wrote:
Deadron, I hope you haven't taken offense to anything I've said, because I probably didn't mean it to be offensive if it seemed that way. It's the way I program. If I am re-inventing the wheel, so be it. I am learning from it. Should I re-invent the wheel and learn, or just steal someone else's wheel? That is the way I program, so deal with it. That's fine. What bothers me is not that you don't use libraries; I really don't give a damn. What bothers me is that in your words you are disparaging people who do make and use libraries. That's the way they program, so deal with it. | |
But do you call your computer yours? It's exactly the same as your argument then. But, if you insist on keeping it in code....
Why do you use the procs that DanTom has written? I'm sure you're smart enough to figure it out yourself. Read(), Write(), round(), min(), max(), etc. (The most common ones that you could easily remake) You could make those yourself, couldn't you? Aren't you just totally in contradiction of your principals? | |
OneFishDown wrote:
There are so many libraries and demos available here that someone could slap a few together and make a "game". Almost forgot about this part: We're not quite there yet, but when there are enough libraries/demos that someone can just slap together a game, BYOND will be in a really great situation, and likely to receive a surge of creativity. It's like digital video and easy video editing and easy web page creation: now that it's so simple that anyone can pull stuff off the shelf and make a movie, we're seeing a creative explosion. Lots of movies and animation and the like that we never would have seen when it required technical engineers to make it happen. I can't wait for BYOND to reach that point, and I'm trying to do my part to make it happen. | |
And you said you used common sense?
Calling some code yours would mean that you wrote it. Calling a computer yours would mean you own it. Using Dantom's built-in procs as opposed to making my own versions of them goes back to the "why not re-make DM?" "point" you made earlier. "If you know how to make the wheel, you shouldn't have to re-invent it." | |
I leave BYOND the day that happens. That lowers the amount of talent and knowledge required to make a game. Shall that one day happen, I suppose I'll eat my words. I thought BYOND was a community of programmers, working together and helping each other to better their programming skills. I guess that was just wishful thinking.
| |
OneFishDown wrote:
I leave BYOND the day that happens. That lowers the amount of talent and knowledge required to make a game. Shall that one day happen, I suppose I'll eat my words. I thought BYOND was a community of programmers, working together and helping each other to better their programming skills. I guess that was just wishful thinking. Knowing how to code actually has nothing to do with making a game. No more than knowing how to put together a hard drive has to do with writing the book on that hard drive. Writing a book has nothing -- absolutely nothing -- to do with constructing hard drives, or writing word processing software. Game design has nothing -- absolutely nothing -- to do with programming. It's fine that you are here to be a programmer. There's a lot to learn here about programming (especially if you study all the libraries, demos, and articles we've spent hundreds of hours putting together), but most people are here to make games. Too bad you can't tolerate people who just want to make games. | |
The only people I can't tolerate are stupid people.
And people thought the hub was filled with a lot of crap now. | |
OneFishDown wrote:
The only people I can't tolerate are stupid people. There's not much more to say. Someday I sincerely hope that you learn that not wanting to be your kind of programmer doesn't make someone stupid. Hopefully you will learn that there are excellent creative people who can put together great games, great books, and great music without knowing how to program. That the only way for BYOND to get great games is if people who aren't great programmers can make them. | |
Deadron wrote:
the only way for BYOND to get great games is if people who aren't great programmers can make them. Whether it be the lack of smart people, the abundance of morons, or the eager-to-learn community, I sometimes feel like giving up on BYOND. You, however, seem a step ahead of me (a step byond me =P). You talk like there is no chance of there being a great programmer on BYOND, so we might as well make game making easier, because nobody here is talented enough to do it. Deadron, I am sorry that I like programming, and am eager to learn more. I am sorry that more people here aren't as eager. I also apologize that text cannot convey the amount of sarcasm I use. | |
OneFishDown wrote:
Whether it be the lack of smart people, the abundance of morons, or the eager-to-learn community, I sometimes feel like giving up on BYOND. You, however, seem a step ahead of me (a step byond me =P). You talk like there is no chance of there being a great programmer on BYOND, so we might as well make game making easier, because nobody here is talented enough to do it. Read my posts again: Game making and programming are unrelated. | |