Sunday, February 12, 2017

Logging the Creation of a Beast -- the Good, the Bad, and the Template Metaprogramming.

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

Postby Detritus » Mon Feb 13, 2017 8:52 am

JoshParnell wrote:55 89 e5

Hrrm... :think:
JoshParnell wrote:b8 39 05 00 00 5d c3

Hrrm... :think:
Image
User avatar
Detritus
Rear Admiral
 
Posts: 1754
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 10:05 pm
Location: Al Nair Gamma III B

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

Postby Achati » Mon Feb 13, 2017 10:23 am

I am voting for option Z too, hoping that once it just "works" you will improve LTSL's grammar and syntax to make it the best for you to work with
(i wold love to use python like light syntax)

so in memory compilation means probably that its only compiling all LTSL when loading the game and then storing that in memory until its needed
it sounds like editing LTSL while the game is running and then letting it recompile would be possible then
also caching the compiled blobs if nothing changes in LTSL

although LJ is probably slightly easier for modders because there is libraries and stuff for lua that wold have to be either ported to LTSL or i dunno
can you interface with other languages from LTSL ?

and thanks for staying (relatively) sane and keeping us updated

PS: i would totally run LTOS as a custom WM/extension of archlinux or something similar
IRC "In Josh we trust"
Achati
Ensign
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 3:54 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

Postby Talvieno » Mon Feb 13, 2017 10:44 am

Personally, I think The Nuclear Option sounds sexy, but would much prefer if we didn't have to use it. :) If it's what it comes down to, and it's a guaranteed failsafe solution, then I'd say... let's do it. :P Better than continuing to search for another option in vain.
Image
Have a question? Send me a PM!
User avatar
Talvieno
Community Manager
 
Posts: 8178
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2014 6:50 pm
Location: North GA, USA

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

Postby JoshParnell » Mon Feb 13, 2017 10:50 am

Detritus wrote:
JoshParnell wrote:55 89 e5

Hrrm... :think:

JoshParnell wrote:b8 39 05 00 00 5d c3

Hrrm... :think:


See below..

ruok wrote:1337 post indeed Josh :geek:


:clap: :clap: :clap:

Hahaha somebody got it woohoo!!! :D Great first post, welcome to the forums ruok :thumbup:

(More responses on the way, but for now, this ^ . I just woke up. Yayy Monday :squirrel: )
“Whether you think you can, or you think you can't--you're right.” ~ Henry Ford
User avatar
JoshParnell
Developer
 
Posts: 4256
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 3:06 pm
Location: Baton Rouge, LA

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

Postby kostuek » Mon Feb 13, 2017 11:32 am

Talvieno wrote:...If it's what it comes down to, and it's a guaranteed failsafe solution...


Is it? I'm kind of sceptical about this. A "mature" ( with many many years of development in it) c++-compiler does a huge amount of optimization while compiling. So the task is not just to convert some script language into machine code, wich is hard enough, but to do it efficient. Or you may end with a very fancy but also very slow machine code.
So, personally, I hope it never comes to "option Z".
kostuek
Ensign
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2014 6:17 am

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

Postby Talvieno » Mon Feb 13, 2017 11:50 am

Well, I don't know whether it is or not, Kostuek, hence why I included the "If". :)
Image
Have a question? Send me a PM!
User avatar
Talvieno
Community Manager
 
Posts: 8178
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2014 6:50 pm
Location: North GA, USA

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

Postby alpan » Mon Feb 13, 2017 12:45 pm

I appreciate that you're still shooting for a 100-ship battle as a benchmark (I think I kind of remember such a target from the initial KS, or the early dev logs). Not because the number is particularly meaningful to me, and certainly not because I expect to be in such battles very often; on the contrary, that you're targeting a scenario that most players will be engaged in at most (lemme guess...) 10% of the time pretty much means the remaining 90% will end up performing very well. Not many software developers approach their work in the same way a civil engineer approaches their bridges. The continued emphasis on robustness is refreshing.
User avatar
alpan
Lieutenant Commander
 
Posts: 189
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 1:38 pm
Location: Istanbul, Turkey

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

Postby Cornflakes_91 » Mon Feb 13, 2017 12:50 pm

You missed a 0 there :ghost:
User avatar
Cornflakes_91
Admiral
 
Posts: 9173
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:53 am
Location: Austria

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

Postby Detritus » Mon Feb 13, 2017 1:14 pm

0

There ya go, I feel so helpful. :ghost:
Image
User avatar
Detritus
Rear Admiral
 
Posts: 1754
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 10:05 pm
Location: Al Nair Gamma III B

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

Postby Achati » Mon Feb 13, 2017 1:29 pm

there is also the option to use the AST and turn it into a format useable by llvm, that is slower but it will give you the optimization
IRC "In Josh we trust"
Achati
Ensign
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 3:54 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

Postby Lum » Mon Feb 13, 2017 2:03 pm

Yeah, please call Hello Games and ask them why their game runs so smoothly, that you must, no, need, no, crave for that knowledge... :twisted:
User avatar
Lum
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 3218
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:10 pm
Location: Potsdam (Germany)

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

Postby Silverware » Mon Feb 13, 2017 2:04 pm

Lum wrote:Yeah, please call Hello Games and ask them why their game runs so smoothly, that you must, no, need, no, crave for that knowledge... :twisted:


Could it maybe be because they removed all of the things that use CPU?
Image
Image
User avatar
Silverware
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 2954
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2014 3:23 pm
Location: Goattown-Three, Sigma Six, Goat Space

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

Postby Lum » Mon Feb 13, 2017 2:06 pm

It was sarcastic.... :ghost:

Or... NMS performs now in another level which I don't know... :problem:
User avatar
Lum
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 3218
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:10 pm
Location: Potsdam (Germany)

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

Postby Miklos » Mon Feb 13, 2017 6:07 pm

That nuclear option sounds awesome tbh
procedurally generated comment
User avatar
Miklos
Lieutenant Commander
 
Posts: 107
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 10:58 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

Postby BFett » Tue Feb 14, 2017 3:24 am

Cornflakes_91 wrote:
BFett wrote:I'll see you in August. :P


How many times similar statements of you have been wrong? :ghost:
Theoretically? 1, though technically zero since I've always said that if Josh starts working on features then it will take 6 months to finish LT. Since Josh hasn't worked on features and instead has been working on the "Fundamental Problem", I have been wrong exactly zero times.

If Josh actually starts working on finishing up LT, we can start the timer and see how far off my guess has been.
User avatar
BFett
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 2497
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 6:44 pm
Location: A galaxy far far away

PreviousNext

Return to Dev Logs



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests