...the main two things that prevented the game from degenerating into a "build up a horde of zerglings and rush" scene, much like every other RTS? The same two things that encourage an active strategy and decision-making?
Upkeep is an excellent realistic step. For those who don't get out much, no nation has ever raised an army by paying its soldiers an initial fee, and nothing else for the rest of their career. I don't imagine Orcs are much different.
The 90-unit limitation is partially there to put a maximum load on the graphics engine, and partially to "strongly encourage" more active play, i.e., you can't just camp in your base building up a 500-member horde before finally setting foot outside.
that Stephenson has submitted a bug to Debian. (Read his In the Beginning Was the Command Line, it's excellent.) A skilled novelist who also participates in the open source process?
That gets him the same free pass that/. gives out to Linus Torvalds and Larry Wall.:-)
(Disclaimer: I run Debian stable at work, and Debian unstable at home.)
This is a self-fullfilling prophecy, and to change this will take quite a major change from the existing Debian (fairly elitist) culture.
No kidding. Fire up your IRC client, connect to one of the Freenode servers, and join #debian. This is, in theory, a user support channel. In reality, the channel is run along the lines of, "if you have to ask a question, any question at all, you're a luser and deserve every flame we can give you." And they're proud of it; just ask mwilson.
I used to try and answer questions on there, but the flames drown out the conversations too quickly. Basically, "The biggest thing holding Debian back isn't Debian, it's #debian." (i.e., the attitude, not the channel itself)
As the Register article points out, one of the reasons we're going to lose is that we didn't even try to convince them. We shouted, we hurled abuse, we held huge meetings and didn't invite the other side, but we didn't actually contact them with an explanation of why the proposed change was bad. ("Open letters" don't do shit, no matter how well-written they are.)
The fact is, that I'd play a Star Wars game because I want to be in the movies. I don't give a wamprats ass about building up my character, completing quests and so on. I want to be a Jedi, I want to fly spaceships, I want to travel to exotic planets and so on.
Exactly. Penny Arcade just had an excellent comment about this aspect of SWG. (Scroll down, it's Gabe's second or third post.)
Basically, walking about a swamp blasting beetles, gnats, and womp-rats while stirring music plays does NOTHING for me.
...about switching programming environments. Right now there's some discussion about problems in regex engines which follow you around as you switch environments, due to problems in the engines.
Curent versions of glibc (apparently) made some inefficient design choices in their regex engine.
When other tools such as sed switched to using glibc's version, their performance dropped quite a bit, leading to a couple
of
bug reports.
The interesting thing is, one of the messages in the bug report mentions this book. It had been a few years since I covered DFAs and NFAs in college, so I got a copy yesterday. Came back home to find this review on/.
...that rather freaky demo clip of the 4-shot.22 caliber "cel phone" starts hitting mainstream web servers. Then "pointing the cel phone like a gun" will get you a whole lot more attention than you expect, and people won't think you're a geek. They'll think your Yet Another Terrorist(c)[tm][dibs].
It's the only country in the world that can honestly list its "average national literacy rate" at a flat freaking 100%.:-)
And, if I'm not mistaken, the only country in the world where every single citizen is bi- or tri-lingual. Like my high-school teachers would say, talk is cheap, learn some more languages.
is that they keep replacing it and reimplementing it in the kernel.
The one linked to in the article (Sistina's) is in 2.4. I'm using it at home, and I like it. We're considering using it at work, but I hear rumours that 2.6 will contain Something Completely Different (Again), which annoys me.
It's supposed to be short. That's the whole point of the online AIP: short summaries of articles.
Why the poster linked to it instead of to a full published article, I don't know. Perhaps a full published writeup hasn't been made yet. Perhaps the poster thought that short sound bites are all that the/. crowd has attention for.
is that the stories of the Silmarillion aren't really meant to be read, like the published forms of the Hobbit and LotR are.
The Silmarillion is meant to be told, out loud, in the manner of a bard in the king's hall, reciting and performing before a crowd. Modern readers find the style dry because they're used to having the facial expressions and voice tones spelled out in the text, or shown to them on television. If you read the stories aloud, you find that they're not so dry after all.
The link seems to be slashdotted. So I don't know what it says.
But I would point out that the "same name" problem was actually an accident, and that when Tolkien discovered it, he decided that they were in fact both referring to the same elf. This, over time, led him to the theory of elvish reincarnation.
The confusion arises over the fact that he never set down "the facts" once and for all. Just kept rewriting and rewriting and amending and playing and rewriting and correcting and branching and reworking until one day he surprised himself by suddenly dying before he had all the stories finished to his own satisfaction.
Here's the other answer that's always the same: what has been done before?
For example, the instructions for copyright assignment for major contributions to libstdc++ spend much of the page discussing the "if you're employed as a programmer, here's what your employer needs to sign" situation. Look it over.
In fairness, I should point out that I don't know how to do most of this either. But I don't complain about volunteer work not living up to my expectations...
I'm not counting TC1 as part of the language until the public actually has access to it (for a fee or otherwise). It's still only available to committee members at present.
Re:(OT) Proportional fields in HTML forms
on
GCC 3.3 Released
·
· Score: 1
Ah. Good point. My mind still thinks monospace font for some reason. Thanks!
Now I understand what Bjarne Stroustrup wrote, when he described/. as "ignorant, and proud of it." Indeed, let the second-guessing begin...
especially for C++, as it's standard keeps "refining" constantly,
The standard hasn't changed since 1998.
as does GCC's interpretation of it. Not to mention the extensions.
The extensions are, in many cases, older than the standard. Now they conflict with rules added by the standard. One or the other has to give. And, of course, no matter what happens, somebody out there will declare that GCC "obviously" made the wrong choice.
If you think it's easy, why don't you give it a try? Hundreds of GCC developers await your contributions on the gcc-patches mailing list.
If you don't like it, you should demand your money back.
Right now I'm [making changes]. What next?
Again, the standard was published in 1998. The three changes you describe were decided upon even before then, and they haven't changed since. You've had 5 years to walk down to the corner bookstore and buy a decent book, or search on the web for "changes to C++ since its standardization". None of those changes are due to GCC, and trying to shift the blame to GCC only points out your employer's laziness.
Slashdot Mirror
...the main two things that prevented the game from degenerating into a "build up a horde of zerglings and rush" scene, much like every other RTS? The same two things that encourage an active strategy and decision-making?
Upkeep is an excellent realistic step. For those who don't get out much, no nation has ever raised an army by paying its soldiers an initial fee, and nothing else for the rest of their career. I don't imagine Orcs are much different.
The 90-unit limitation is partially there to put a maximum load on the graphics engine, and partially to "strongly encourage" more active play, i.e., you can't just camp in your base building up a 500-member horde before finally setting foot outside.
Dunno, I get plenty each time I submit a bug... are you forgetting the -ass parameter to reportbug(1)?
You missed the part where I said I was one of the people trying to answer questions, not ask them...
that Stephenson has submitted a bug to Debian. (Read his In the Beginning Was the Command Line, it's excellent.) A skilled novelist who also participates in the open source process?
That gets him the same free pass that /. gives out to Linus Torvalds and Larry Wall. :-)
(Disclaimer: I run Debian stable at work, and Debian unstable at home.)
No kidding. Fire up your IRC client, connect to one of the Freenode servers, and join #debian. This is, in theory, a user support channel. In reality, the channel is run along the lines of, "if you have to ask a question, any question at all, you're a luser and deserve every flame we can give you." And they're proud of it; just ask mwilson.
I used to try and answer questions on there, but the flames drown out the conversations too quickly. Basically, "The biggest thing holding Debian back isn't Debian, it's #debian." (i.e., the attitude, not the channel itself)
I see you've managed to miss the entire point of that part of the Bible. *shrug* No skin off my back.
As the Register article points out, one of the reasons we're going to lose is that we didn't even try to convince them. We shouted, we hurled abuse, we held huge meetings and didn't invite the other side, but we didn't actually contact them with an explanation of why the proposed change was bad. ("Open letters" don't do shit, no matter how well-written they are.)
There's a big big difference between "evil" and "righteous indignation".
Or, put another way, getting angry at evil is the Right Thing to Do.
Exactly. Penny Arcade just had an excellent comment about this aspect of SWG. (Scroll down, it's Gabe's second or third post.)
Basically, walking about a swamp blasting beetles, gnats, and womp-rats while stirring music plays does NOTHING for me.
...about switching programming environments. Right now there's some discussion about problems in regex engines which follow you around as you switch environments, due to problems in the engines.
Curent versions of glibc (apparently) made some inefficient design choices in their regex engine. When other tools such as sed switched to using glibc's version, their performance dropped quite a bit, leading to a couple of bug reports.
The interesting thing is, one of the messages in the bug report mentions this book. It had been a few years since I covered DFAs and NFAs in college, so I got a copy yesterday. Came back home to find this review on /.
...that rather freaky demo clip of the 4-shot
...something like 1200 addresses for each square meter of Earth's surface land. I forget who told me that.
Remember that, like IPv4, not every possible combination of those 128 bits is a valid address.
It's the only country in the world that can honestly list its "average national literacy rate" at a flat freaking 100%.
And, if I'm not mistaken, the only country in the world where every single citizen is bi- or tri-lingual. Like my high-school teachers would say, talk is cheap, learn some more languages.
is that they keep replacing it and reimplementing it in the kernel.
The one linked to in the article (Sistina's) is in 2.4. I'm using it at home, and I like it. We're considering using it at work, but I hear rumours that 2.6 will contain Something Completely Different (Again), which annoys me.
I predict that Daikatana will take all five of the Top Five Mistakes.
I don't know. It's getting pretty pathetic around here lat- hey! Shiny things!
It's supposed to be short. That's the whole point of the online AIP: short summaries of articles.
Why the poster linked to it instead of to a full published article, I don't know. Perhaps a full published writeup hasn't been made yet. Perhaps the poster thought that short sound bites are all that the /. crowd has attention for.
is that the stories of the Silmarillion aren't really meant to be read, like the published forms of the Hobbit and LotR are.
The Silmarillion is meant to be told, out loud, in the manner of a bard in the king's hall, reciting and performing before a crowd. Modern readers find the style dry because they're used to having the facial expressions and voice tones spelled out in the text, or shown to them on television. If you read the stories aloud, you find that they're not so dry after all.
The link seems to be slashdotted. So I don't know what it says.
But I would point out that the "same name" problem was actually an accident, and that when Tolkien discovered it, he decided that they were in fact both referring to the same elf. This, over time, led him to the theory of elvish reincarnation.
The confusion arises over the fact that he never set down "the facts" once and for all. Just kept rewriting and rewriting and amending and playing and rewriting and correcting and branching and reworking until one day he surprised himself by suddenly dying before he had all the stories finished to his own satisfaction.
Here's the other answer that's always the same: what has been done before?
For example, the instructions for copyright assignment for major contributions to libstdc++ spend much of the page discussing the "if you're employed as a programmer, here's what your employer needs to sign" situation. Look it over.
I wish I'd carried one of these in my CS courses.
In fairness, I should point out that I don't know how to do most of this either. But I don't complain about volunteer work not living up to my expectations...
I'm not counting TC1 as part of the language until the public actually has access to it (for a fee or otherwise). It's still only available to committee members at present.
Ah. Good point. My mind still thinks monospace font for some reason. Thanks!
Now I understand what Bjarne Stroustrup wrote, when he described
The standard hasn't changed since 1998.
The extensions are, in many cases, older than the standard. Now they conflict with rules added by the standard. One or the other has to give. And, of course, no matter what happens, somebody out there will declare that GCC "obviously" made the wrong choice.
If you think it's easy, why don't you give it a try? Hundreds of GCC developers await your contributions on the gcc-patches mailing list.
If you don't like it, you should demand your money back.
Again, the standard was published in 1998. The three changes you describe were decided upon even before then, and they haven't changed since. You've had 5 years to walk down to the corner bookstore and buy a decent book, or search on the web for "changes to C++ since its standardization". None of those changes are due to GCC, and trying to shift the blame to GCC only points out your employer's laziness.
You've had half a decade. Catch the hell up.