Interactive fiction hasn't died, and you can certainly play it on your PDA. Furthermore, it's generally acknowledged that the quality of modern works has surpassed that of Infocom. Baf's guide is probably a good place to dip your toes in, but there's resources all over the place and the annual competition has just finished.
An interactive novel, at least the kind you're probably thinking about with deeply implemented characters and so forth, is probably AI-complete. It's not about the disk space and processor speed, it's about the inherent trickiness.
Apart from the fact that it didn't happen in the book, what was wrong with the side trip to Osgiliath? The commentary track did not need to (and in fact, didn't) explain this trip, except in reference to the departure from the book.
Answer 1: The movies were based on the book. The movies did certain things differently. It was interesting to find out why.
Answer 2: The movies were not seminars, but the commentary tracks sort of were. Hence, a seminar-like approach was appropriate.
Answer 3: Making a movie requires thousands of individual decisions, each of which can be individually justified (or not) without crossing the line from movie to seminar.
Seriously, there is nothing socialist about free software.
From each according to their worth, to each according to their need. It's classic socialism, in its best and most effective sense.
The compulsions and central bodies you speak of are aspects of socialism as it is often implemented. This doesn't imply that things which don't have these features are not socialism.
The comment you're replying to says the voters were senior advertising execs. I understand that many of these people have, on occasion, used the internet.
Amsterdam to Melbourne is at least 20 hours of flying time, plus the stopover. But you can do it for around US$1000. I would pay a metric shitload of cash for a four hour version.
At the same time, I have to marvel at technology that lets me travel halfway around the planet in only a day. I just wish it was more comfortable.
Yep, block reads, sorry. My point was that the block read doesn't happen if it already resides in memory, so there's no question of it going to the kernel. I'm not talking about the kernel's disk block cache, but the database application's. Whether MySQL implements this sort of caching, or whether it relies on the OS, I don't know. It's clear that the latter technique will lead to performance degredation.
I understand, from further reading, that Prevayler uses hashed lookups. This is clearly faster than a tree search, but not useful for partial key searches or key scanning.
I think we're both arguing the same point: that Prevayler is not much faster than MySQL, except by virtue of the fact that its database resides in RAM. I was just trying to explain the 300,000% discrepancy between the claimed speed of Prevayler and the speed of MySQL with a RAM backing store
Yep. I think a hash table instead of a B tree would account for the difference, but that's such a particular case (retrieve the record with this exact key) that to me it seems worthless as an indicator of general speed.
And of course every time the MySQL process performs a "disk" read, control reverts to the kernel and the process sacrifices the rest of its quantum.
I don't know how this is implemented in MySQL, but reverting control to the kernel is not inevitable.
You ask for a particular page, and if it isn't in memory, then you go to disk. Otherwise, you get the page immediately. The only slow down is the extra mapping required, though it's trivial to set things up so that this is pretty close to zero if the database is smaller than available memory.
When doing a key search, it's true that the normal algorithms are optimised for minimising page reads, which may result in slightly worse performance. But not by much.
So I suppose my point is that Prevayler's assumptions do not lead it to be naturally faster than MySQL by more than a trivial amount.
(I've been involved in the implementation of two databases, neither of which you've ever heard of)
At one time this amazed scientists - blind people could walk through a room without hitting objects. So, they covered their bodies in thick felt, and the blind still had their obstacle sense. Then, they filled their ears with wax, and the blind bumped into things.
And then they published their results, in a brightly coloured book called "21 Fun Things to do with Blind People."
Slashdot Mirror
Interactive fiction hasn't died, and you can certainly play it on your PDA. Furthermore, it's generally acknowledged that the quality of modern works has surpassed that of Infocom. Baf's guide is probably a good place to dip your toes in, but there's resources all over the place and the annual competition has just finished.
An interactive novel, at least the kind you're probably thinking about with deeply implemented characters and so forth, is probably AI-complete. It's not about the disk space and processor speed, it's about the inherent trickiness.
What do you mean by expensive? I'm sure I paid about 60 euros to get a return ticket from Paris to Lyons, which seemed reasonable at the time.
Apart from the fact that it didn't happen in the book, what was wrong with the side trip to Osgiliath? The commentary track did not need to (and in fact, didn't) explain this trip, except in reference to the departure from the book.
No matter who voted for it, they are wrong.
Oh, absolutely they were wrong, and in fact it's just the sort of navel gazing you'd expect from such a self-obsessed group.
But, I mean, that was the survey, and these are the results. The real question is why this got any press at all.
Answer 1: The movies were based on the book. The movies did certain things differently. It was interesting to find out why.
Answer 2: The movies were not seminars, but the commentary tracks sort of were. Hence, a seminar-like approach was appropriate.
Answer 3: Making a movie requires thousands of individual decisions, each of which can be individually justified (or not) without crossing the line from movie to seminar.
Seriously, there is nothing socialist about free software.
From each according to their worth, to each according to their need. It's classic socialism, in its best and most effective sense.
The compulsions and central bodies you speak of are aspects of socialism as it is often implemented. This doesn't imply that things which don't have these features are not socialism.
The comment you're replying to says the voters were senior advertising execs. I understand that many of these people have, on occasion, used the internet.
Amsterdam to Melbourne is at least 20 hours of flying time, plus the stopover. But you can do it for around US$1000. I would pay a metric shitload of cash for a four hour version.
At the same time, I have to marvel at technology that lets me travel halfway around the planet in only a day. I just wish it was more comfortable.
You criticised a book which you clearly haven't read, you were called on it, and this is your best comeback?
This is why I hate using the C family of programming languages -- writing unnatural code to avoid language bugs is not my cup of tea.
DoD: when ADA# for?
Here
the little guys can sometimes really kick ass too!
Or at least ankles.
Beautiful people have an advantage in everything.
Yes, we do.
And I'd appreciate it if you'd wear your paper bag next time you post something. Thanks.
The study was biased as women (and left-handed men) were left out. Similar to the ducks.
Women and left handed men were left out of the duck study? I'm going to write to my MP.
Consider the fact that an old person from my perspective is anyone age 30 or higher.
OK, so you've redefined the word "old", and wonder of wonders, a statement that uses it is no longer true.
Man, kids today, etc etc.
Yep, block reads, sorry. My point was that the block read doesn't happen if it already resides in memory, so there's no question of it going to the kernel. I'm not talking about the kernel's disk block cache, but the database application's. Whether MySQL implements this sort of caching, or whether it relies on the OS, I don't know. It's clear that the latter technique will lead to performance degredation.
I understand, from further reading, that Prevayler uses hashed lookups. This is clearly faster than a tree search, but not useful for partial key searches or key scanning.
I think we're both arguing the same point: that Prevayler is not much faster than MySQL, except by virtue of the fact that its database resides in RAM. I was just trying to explain the 300,000% discrepancy between the claimed speed of Prevayler and the speed of MySQL with a RAM backing store
Yep. I think a hash table instead of a B tree would account for the difference, but that's such a particular case (retrieve the record with this exact key) that to me it seems worthless as an indicator of general speed.
And of course every time the MySQL process performs a "disk" read, control reverts to the kernel and the process sacrifices the rest of its quantum.
I don't know how this is implemented in MySQL, but reverting control to the kernel is not inevitable.
You ask for a particular page, and if it isn't in memory, then you go to disk. Otherwise, you get the page immediately. The only slow down is the extra mapping required, though it's trivial to set things up so that this is pretty close to zero if the database is smaller than available memory.
When doing a key search, it's true that the normal algorithms are optimised for minimising page reads, which may result in slightly worse performance. But not by much.
So I suppose my point is that Prevayler's assumptions do not lead it to be naturally faster than MySQL by more than a trivial amount.
(I've been involved in the implementation of two databases, neither of which you've ever heard of)
For those who were wearing a nappy when this game was out, link so that you too can enjoy what was the cutting edge of computer sound technology.
I mean, it only took the PC ten years to catch up.
I know you kids won't remember this, but
... stay a while ... stay for ever!
Another visitor
Oh, look a link
action packed, high-tension situation
Exactly which universe were you watching this Tomb Raider in?
At one time this amazed scientists - blind people could walk through a room without hitting objects. So, they covered their bodies in thick felt, and the blind still had their obstacle sense. Then, they filled their ears with wax, and the blind bumped into things.
And then they published their results, in a brightly coloured book called "21 Fun Things to do with Blind People."
Kimba is drek, bad animation, crap story telling, horrid characterization and dribbling dialog.
You're going to pay for that, son.
Do you really think they're doing this for the money?
You went through the photo looking for chicks? You really have to get out of the house more.
scientific theory now agrees that bumblebees can fly.
Thank goodness! Have the bumblebees been informed?