Slashdot Mirror

If there's a million "open source" licenses (which there are), it can become virtually impossible for code to move between projects with different licensing.

Chris Dibona is known for actively working against licenses such as the GPL and MPL that guarantee openness of source code. In promoting this agenda he has alienated himself and Google from a significant part of the open source community.

In a related policy, only Subversion, which uses the non-copyleft Apache license favored by Dibona, is allowed on the code.google.com project hosting site. Git, mercurial and every other modern open source version control system are permanently banned. Do not bother asking about it, it is a faq item that only Subversion will be supported, in spite of its deficiencies.

Google/Dibona says: "Why aren't you offering my favorite tool? We want our collaborative development environment to be simple, fast, reliable, and scalable, so we only offer tools that are aligned with those goals. But this is hardly credible. Both GIT and Mercurial are faster, more reliable, more scalable and more simple than Subversion, which is apparently favored only because of license prejudice, or perhaps because Dibona shares his office with Greg Stein, the Subversion developer.

Uhh.. I call shenanigans.
I write games also in, get this... VB.NET. (Which turns into the same CLR code as any other managed language)
Fairly complex stuff, not commercial quality, but impressive none the less. Commercial quality of 4-5 years ago maybe. My current project has about 180 pages of source and that compiles in about 15 seconds on my 2.5Ghz machine. I'm using DirectX 9.0 SDK summer update 2005. You're aware that Quake II was ported to .NET and runs just fine? http://www.vertigosoftware.com/Quake2.htm Compiling that took about 90 seconds on my machine. I noticed approximately 80-90% the performance level of the original C / Assembly version. Maybe there is something wrong with your code, or design.

My development experience in VB.NET has been a pleasure. I write bash/perl shell scrips at work all day so this is polar opposites. The brain dead IDE and syntax makes things nice and easy, and I can focus on problem solving and complex algorithms. Also the speed penalty is more than acceptable, unless you are writing some very serious games.

And here's a guide for setting up Subversion and Tortoise on Windows, really easy.

Just do the math:

According to http://www.bytonic.de/html/benchmarks.html, Java version performance is 79% to 106% of original C code.

According to http://www.vertigosoftware.com/Quake2FAQ.htm, Managed C++.NET version performance is about 85% of natice C++, and they are both slower than original C code.

There's a small advantage for Java, but the performance is essencially the same. Not surprising, since Java and .NET have very similar architectures (Java bytecode running on a JVM versus .NET common language running on a CLR)

Can we get a comparison of the Java and .NET ports of this?

The .NET port can be found at http://www.vertigosoftware.com/Quake2.htm

I can't do you Quake4, but how about Quake 2?

(Eactly how much Win32 do you think Quake 4 is going to use anyway?)

It's ported to Managed C++ a year ago.

HTML ahoy: Quake II .NET, QuakeForge, The Transfusion Project, Mac GLQuake, Tenebrae and the related industri. While you could argue about what meets your personal definition of "great", these look pretty good to me. Especially text mode Quake.

I BEG to disagree. You are quite misinformed.

Of course, now that I have actually downloaded the source and run `grep -r ++` in the source directory, I see my error... :-)

As an aside, Vertigo Software just released Quake 2 ported to managed C++. It's a fairly straightforward conversion from C to managed C++ for the .Net platform. It runs fairly well, they're showing it's 15% or so slower, but at the 300 FPS range it doesn't really bother me... You can find it here.

As an aside, Vertigo Software just released Quake 2 ported to managed C++. It's a fairly straightforward conversion from C to managed C++ for the .Net platform. It runs fairly well, they're showing it's 15% or so slower, but at the 300 FPS range it doesn't really bother me... You can find it here.