When it comes to execution speed, yes, Python often is slower than C++.
When it comes to implementation speed, complex algorithms can often be implemented in Python far faster than in C++.
In these days of tight deadlines and fierce competition, especially in the gaming industry, the implementation speed/capabilities sometimes exceed the performance concerns. With computers getting ever faster, the time saved using Python often far exceeds the performance losses.
With a game such as this, increased AI "intelligence" could very well mitigate the slightly slower execution. Python allows for extremely complex systems to be developed very quickly, at the expense of runtime performance. Neural nets, for instance, can be implemented far easier in Python than in C++.
I appreciate your concern for my health and wellbeing, but if anyone needs psychiatric help it would most likely be your friends.
Were they victims of college football initiations? Indeed, that is some of the worst man-on-man rape that has ever happened. There are many accounts of guys getting broomsticks shoved up their asses, for instance. As a fellow team member, why did you not stop their molestation? Or were you the one performing the rape?
It should only take a competent programmer a couple of days, if even that, to become well accustomed to Python. And it's often far easier for your average person to learn than C++ is.
I reject your hypothesis on the basis that the assumptions it makes are incorrect.
Perhaps somebody will embed the Python (or Lua, etc.) interpreter into such an AI DLL, allowing for the AI to be written in a language that is often better suited for such complex tasks.
Re:How much difference between Java and C++?
on
OpenOffice Bloated?
·
· Score: 0
You admit that Java was causing the problems. Then you pretend you can't understand that fact. Like it or not, the problems were solved when Java was removed from the picture. Hence, Java is to blame for the problems.
The AI for Civ IV is written entirely in C++. However, all the AI code (as well as game code) is compiled into a separate DLL which can be replaced with a modified version. Essentially, the SDK release will be all of the files required to build this DLL. Thus, changing the AI and "core" game rules (such as terrain, movement, production, etc.) is possible - one could implement a completely different combat model, for example.
It is surprising that the AI was not written in Python, which is highly integrated with this game. Indeed, Python is just the sort of language for writing such code. However, was it not done this way due to the slower execution speed of Python code, relative to C++?
You don't belong here with the big boys (and maybe girl, if Eugenia counts as a girl) at Slashdot. Head on over to the GameFAQs.com forums. They're rife with angsty emo teens such yourself.
Indeed, with APT you get the benefits of Slackware-like packages with minimal and functioning dependency support. RPM, on the other hand, is just a waste of time and resources.
The minor speed tradeoff between APT and just untarring tarballs is well worth it, when you consider the dependency handling. On the other hand, RPM offers no benefits over APT, and is far slower.
In the end, distros that do not use RPM often trump those that do.
Where do you get that Excel cannot be compiled with Visual Studio? Are/were you a Microsoft employee, who is/was on the Excel build team? If so, and your assertion is true, what compiler are they using instead?
FLTK is hardly suitable for this scale of development. It's good for small apps, but it most likely does not scale to an application the size of OpenOffice.org. Last I knew, it still handled callbacks using function pointers. That's not a very clean design at all.
Qt is perhaps a better choice, from a technical standpoint. But then there are licensing issues that may need to be addressed, especially when it comes to Sun selling their modified version.
And no, OO.o uses their own GUI framework. Transitioning to a toolkit like Qt would most likely be quite difficult, time consuming, and perhaps without benefit in the end.
Re:How much difference between Java and C++?
on
OpenOffice Bloated?
·
· Score: 1
Often times Java is responsible for slow GUI applications. That's not a myth, as much as Sun would like you to think it is. Try even a mid-sized application like Columba. You'll notice that it feels far slower than Thunderbird, or Seamonkey, or Outlook Express, even when using a modern JVM.
In this case, as previous posts here have suggested, the use of a JRE for scripting capabilities is resulting in long startup times, even if most of OO.o is written in C++. Disabling Java support resulted in vastly improved startup times. That does lead us to believe that Java is somewhat responsible for some of the problems that have been noted.
Thanks, Barry! That's a fantastic article. It really discusses the relevant points, and makes a strong case. I'd suggest that everyone read it. It does discuss matters from an excellent perspective.
Re:"Essentially" the same data?
on
OpenOffice Bloated?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Indeed, those products are rather lousy on Windows. But then again, Windows is vastly different from UNIX, and the UNIX layers on Windows (like Cygwin) aren't very good.
On Linux, BSD or Solaris, for instance, such programs work very well. Indeed, one only needs to look at Kylix to see the reverse being true. The port of the Delphi IDE, using Wine, was terrible. It crashed terribly often, not that it was completely stable under Windows, mind you.
Start actually using the machine. Install packages, remove packages. Do upgrades and perform updates. Even after just six months or so, you'll notice the difference between similar RPM- and APT-based systems. It'll be a snap to install dpkg packages, but it'll take ages to install RPMs.
Nevertheless, the fact of the matter is that any distro that is based around RPM should most likely be avoided. The only truly usable RPM-based distro has proven to be SuSE, but even then that's only because they've invested heavily in YaST2. Fedora, Mandrake/Mandriva, and many other RPM-based distros will pale to Debian when it comes to package management.
A single user downloading multiple copies of Firefox increases the downloads/users ratio.
A business/school/distro allowing multiple users to use one download of Firefox decreases the downloads/users ratio.
It's not too difficult to understand the effect each situation (ie. "force") has on the number of downloads. We do not know the magnitudes of such effects, but we do know the "direction".
What if you just give them one of your testes or ovaries when you first download Firefox? If you download it again, then they'll crush your ovary/testicle. If you stop using Firefox, then you can request your organ back. When they want a fairly accurate count of Firefox users, all they have to do is count the number of ovaries and testes that they have.
That's curious. I could see such equipment not working out-of-the-box with Red Hat 9, but that's not surprising considering its age and lack of quality. However, it is suspect that it is not working with SuSE and Ubuntu, plus the others.
Indeed, these researchers are on the cutting edge of technology. They're pushing today's computing systems to the limit. It is research like this that will truly help drive forward computer hardware. Much like the Apollo project resulted in so much technological spin-off, we're bound to see the same happen with this sort of research, too.
Some document format that 99.9% of the population doesn't care about will not become that big of an issue. That's especially true when you consider that there are far more major issues at hand, such as taxation and education. Even in a far more enlightened state like Massachusetts, issues like those far exceed what word processor the state government decides to use.
Slashdot Mirror
When it comes to execution speed, yes, Python often is slower than C++.
When it comes to implementation speed, complex algorithms can often be implemented in Python far faster than in C++.
In these days of tight deadlines and fierce competition, especially in the gaming industry, the implementation speed/capabilities sometimes exceed the performance concerns. With computers getting ever faster, the time saved using Python often far exceeds the performance losses.
Thank you for your opinion. I have disregarded it.
Yes, I thought about performance reasons. You obviously didn't bother to read my initial post on this matter:
However, was it not done this way due to the slower execution speed of Python code, relative to C++?
See, I specifically covered that very topic.
With a game such as this, increased AI "intelligence" could very well mitigate the slightly slower execution. Python allows for extremely complex systems to be developed very quickly, at the expense of runtime performance. Neural nets, for instance, can be implemented far easier in Python than in C++.
I appreciate your concern for my health and wellbeing, but if anyone needs psychiatric help it would most likely be your friends.
Were they victims of college football initiations? Indeed, that is some of the worst man-on-man rape that has ever happened. There are many accounts of guys getting broomsticks shoved up their asses, for instance. As a fellow team member, why did you not stop their molestation? Or were you the one performing the rape?
It should only take a competent programmer a couple of days, if even that, to become well accustomed to Python. And it's often far easier for your average person to learn than C++ is.
I reject your hypothesis on the basis that the assumptions it makes are incorrect.
Perhaps somebody will embed the Python (or Lua, etc.) interpreter into such an AI DLL, allowing for the AI to be written in a language that is often better suited for such complex tasks.
You admit that Java was causing the problems. Then you pretend you can't understand that fact. Like it or not, the problems were solved when Java was removed from the picture. Hence, Java is to blame for the problems.
The AI for Civ IV is written entirely in C++. However, all the AI code (as well as game code) is compiled into a separate DLL which can be replaced with a modified version. Essentially, the SDK release will be all of the files required to build this DLL. Thus, changing the AI and "core" game rules (such as terrain, movement, production, etc.) is possible - one could implement a completely different combat model, for example.
It is surprising that the AI was not written in Python, which is highly integrated with this game. Indeed, Python is just the sort of language for writing such code. However, was it not done this way due to the slower execution speed of Python code, relative to C++?
It's only unauthorized if you put it up her butt.
You don't belong here with the big boys (and maybe girl, if Eugenia counts as a girl) at Slashdot. Head on over to the GameFAQs.com forums. They're rife with angsty emo teens such yourself.
How does it handle dependencies?
Indeed, with APT you get the benefits of Slackware-like packages with minimal and functioning dependency support. RPM, on the other hand, is just a waste of time and resources.
The minor speed tradeoff between APT and just untarring tarballs is well worth it, when you consider the dependency handling. On the other hand, RPM offers no benefits over APT, and is far slower.
In the end, distros that do not use RPM often trump those that do.
Have you tried having intercourse with her while she sleeps?
Where do you get that Excel cannot be compiled with Visual Studio? Are/were you a Microsoft employee, who is/was on the Excel build team? If so, and your assertion is true, what compiler are they using instead?
FLTK is hardly suitable for this scale of development. It's good for small apps, but it most likely does not scale to an application the size of OpenOffice.org. Last I knew, it still handled callbacks using function pointers. That's not a very clean design at all.
Qt is perhaps a better choice, from a technical standpoint. But then there are licensing issues that may need to be addressed, especially when it comes to Sun selling their modified version.
And no, OO.o uses their own GUI framework. Transitioning to a toolkit like Qt would most likely be quite difficult, time consuming, and perhaps without benefit in the end.
Often times Java is responsible for slow GUI applications. That's not a myth, as much as Sun would like you to think it is. Try even a mid-sized application like Columba. You'll notice that it feels far slower than Thunderbird, or Seamonkey, or Outlook Express, even when using a modern JVM.
In this case, as previous posts here have suggested, the use of a JRE for scripting capabilities is resulting in long startup times, even if most of OO.o is written in C++. Disabling Java support resulted in vastly improved startup times. That does lead us to believe that Java is somewhat responsible for some of the problems that have been noted.
Thanks, Barry! That's a fantastic article. It really discusses the relevant points, and makes a strong case. I'd suggest that everyone read it. It does discuss matters from an excellent perspective.
Indeed, those products are rather lousy on Windows. But then again, Windows is vastly different from UNIX, and the UNIX layers on Windows (like Cygwin) aren't very good.
On Linux, BSD or Solaris, for instance, such programs work very well. Indeed, one only needs to look at Kylix to see the reverse being true. The port of the Delphi IDE, using Wine, was terrible. It crashed terribly often, not that it was completely stable under Windows, mind you.
Start actually using the machine. Install packages, remove packages. Do upgrades and perform updates. Even after just six months or so, you'll notice the difference between similar RPM- and APT-based systems. It'll be a snap to install dpkg packages, but it'll take ages to install RPMs.
Nevertheless, the fact of the matter is that any distro that is based around RPM should most likely be avoided. The only truly usable RPM-based distro has proven to be SuSE, but even then that's only because they've invested heavily in YaST2. Fedora, Mandrake/Mandriva, and many other RPM-based distros will pale to Debian when it comes to package management.
It's quite simple, indeed.
A single user downloading multiple copies of Firefox increases the downloads/users ratio.
A business/school/distro allowing multiple users to use one download of Firefox decreases the downloads/users ratio.
It's not too difficult to understand the effect each situation (ie. "force") has on the number of downloads. We do not know the magnitudes of such effects, but we do know the "direction".
What if you just give them one of your testes or ovaries when you first download Firefox? If you download it again, then they'll crush your ovary/testicle. If you stop using Firefox, then you can request your organ back. When they want a fairly accurate count of Firefox users, all they have to do is count the number of ovaries and testes that they have.
That's curious. I could see such equipment not working out-of-the-box with Red Hat 9, but that's not surprising considering its age and lack of quality. However, it is suspect that it is not working with SuSE and Ubuntu, plus the others.
What brands/models/etc. did you try?
I may be old, but I will always be here for you, friend.
Indeed, these researchers are on the cutting edge of technology. They're pushing today's computing systems to the limit. It is research like this that will truly help drive forward computer hardware. Much like the Apollo project resulted in so much technological spin-off, we're bound to see the same happen with this sort of research, too.
just the other night I did a cat and two goats, but the crazy voices in my head keep telling me to upgrade...
After raping these animals, did the voices go away? Or did they prompt you to sexually molest other things, like your video card?
You should try reading the article next time. You'll be able to contribute more to the discussion that way.
Some document format that 99.9% of the population doesn't care about will not become that big of an issue. That's especially true when you consider that there are far more major issues at hand, such as taxation and education. Even in a far more enlightened state like Massachusetts, issues like those far exceed what word processor the state government decides to use.