Tool: DEFCON ModSuite [BETA]

Discuss your new mods and themes here

Moderator: Defcon moderators

User avatar
wwarnick
level5
level5
Posts: 1863
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:44 pm
Location: Rexburg, ID

Postby wwarnick » Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:05 pm

Good work. XANDER was right when he said you're a credit to your species, ZaNzEr.
I just wish it was in C#. I gave up learning C++ as soon as I began C#. .NET forever.
User avatar
NeoThermic
Introversion Staff
Introversion Staff
Posts: 6254
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2002 10:55 am
Location: ::1
Contact:

Postby NeoThermic » Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:23 pm

Some nice code, although I do wonder at your approch :)

You've gone all out and decided to use windows only constructs and calls, so porting this to linux/mac would require a small rewrite. I'm not too sure why you didn't decide to stick with gl & glut or gl & SDL :P

I also have to say, I had to laugh a bit at this comment:

Code: Select all

/* must fix accuracy */


NeoThermic
denzil
level2
level2
Posts: 120
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 5:59 pm
Location: Bournemouth, UK.
Contact:

Postby denzil » Fri Oct 20, 2006 5:11 pm

wwarnick wrote:Good work. XANDER was right when he said you're a credit to your species, ZaNzEr.
I just wish it was in C#. I gave up learning C++ as soon as I began C#. .NET forever.


So true, I could help code if it was C#, such a nicer platform on .NET :)
DEFCON_Preorderer
level0
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:45 pm

Postby DEFCON_Preorderer » Fri Oct 20, 2006 8:04 pm

zanzer7 wrote:Try running the suite from outside the Defcon directory first?

Well it's just in My Documents now, was it supposed to be somewhere else?
User avatar
zach
level5
level5
Posts: 1350
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 1:21 pm
Location: Denmarkia
Contact:

Postby zach » Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:44 pm

denzil wrote:So true, I could help code if it was C#, such a nicer platform on .NET :)
And so portable! ... No, wait ... :roll:

And DEFCON_Preorderer, it should be able to run out-of-the-box ... Did you unzip all the files? Did you change the directory structure?
spindash
level0
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 1:53 pm

glow + empty map.

Postby spindash » Sun Oct 22, 2006 1:57 pm

anyone know how to do that glow thing? cause it looks weird because all the coastlines have that nice blue glow but the ones i make dont...any ideas?

also how do i empty the world map and make my own one?
User avatar
prophile
level5
level5
Posts: 1541
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 4:17 pm
Location: Southampton, UK
Contact:

Postby prophile » Sun Oct 22, 2006 2:27 pm

suite.cpp wrote:

Code: Select all

/*
 * DEFCON ModSuite
 * Copyright (C) 2006 zanzer7
 *
 * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
 * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
 * as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2
 * of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
 *
 * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
 * GNU General Public License for more details.
[...]


GPL... *sigh*

When will you people learn? :roll:

zanzer7 wrote:And so portable! ... No, wait ... :roll:


Frankly it's so full of windows-isms that changing to C# would have very little difference on portability anyway.
User avatar
zach
level5
level5
Posts: 1350
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 1:21 pm
Location: Denmarkia
Contact:

Postby zach » Sun Oct 22, 2006 2:48 pm

prophile wrote:GPL... *sigh*

When will you people learn? :roll:
I'm not used to releasing applications. What would you've suggested? :)

prophile wrote:Frankly it's so full of windows-isms that changing to C# would have very little difference on portability anyway.
It's the window calling function that's full of windows-isms. Not the actual code (as far as I know, anyway :roll:).

spindash wrote:anyone know how to do that glow thing? cause it looks weird because all the coastlines have that nice blue glow but the ones i make dont...any ideas?
The 'glow' is simply 'data\graphics\blur.bmp', stretched out on the entire world map ;)

spindash wrote:also how do i empty the world map and make my own one?
Just remove 'coastlines.dat', and preferrably 'international.dat'. You can rename your coastlines file to 'coastlines-low.dat' when you're done; for the low detail coastlines
User avatar
Kuth
level4
level4
Posts: 709
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 5:55 am
Location: Keele Imperium
Contact:

Postby Kuth » Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:01 am

Have there been any improvements of this?

Frankly when I boot this up, it gets stuck on startup.

Looking forward to a bug-free final version!
Faxmachinen
level1
level1
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:11 pm

Postby Faxmachinen » Wed Nov 15, 2006 7:44 pm

If it gets stuck at startup but doesn't crash with an error message, you've likely provided an image whose size isn't a power of two. For some reason OpenGL will still load such images (eventually), but everything just goes a lot slower.

An improved version will hopefully be available in the very near future.
User avatar
zach
level5
level5
Posts: 1350
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 1:21 pm
Location: Denmarkia
Contact:

Postby zach » Wed Nov 15, 2006 10:47 pm

Faxmachinen wrote:An improved version will hopefully be available in the very near future.
Thanks to Faxmachinen, mind you :roll:
User avatar
wwarnick
level5
level5
Posts: 1863
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:44 pm
Location: Rexburg, ID

Postby wwarnick » Sat Dec 02, 2006 5:48 am

zanzer7 wrote:And so portable! ... No, wait ... :roll:

Only for the time being. As soon as frameworks are created for Mac and Linux, you'll be seeing a whole lot more of .NET. Just like DirectX, the frameworks will be distributed with the applications. .NET is the future! .NET is life!

But really, .NET reduces bugs, shortens compile time, reduces executable size (not that that's a big issue), simplifies many previously tedious processes, and reduces coding time significantly without any real decrease in power (c#, not vb). The slightly lessened (very slightly) performance is only an issue with games and other resource intensive apps. And besides, c# is a really clean language, so much more logical and intuitive without the dumbing down of VB. The language for me. And I would recommend it to anyone else interested. BTW - There are actually areas in which .NET performs better. And it supports true language interoperability without middleware, unlike what COM attempts to do. And it's just plain old awesome! (I personally think it kicks Java in the nuts, but that's just me)

wwarnick
User avatar
xander
level5
level5
Posts: 16869
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Highland, CA, USA
Contact:

Postby xander » Sat Dec 02, 2006 6:41 am

wwarnick wrote:
zanzer7 wrote:And so portable! ... No, wait ... :roll:

Only for the time being. As soon as frameworks are created for Mac and Linux, you'll be seeing a whole lot more of .NET. Just like DirectX, the frameworks will be distributed with the applications. .NET is the future! .NET is life!

But really, .NET reduces bugs, shortens compile time, reduces executable size (not that that's a big issue), simplifies many previously tedious processes, and reduces coding time significantly without any real decrease in power (c#, not vb). The slightly lessened (very slightly) performance is only an issue with games and other resource intensive apps. And besides, c# is a really clean language, so much more logical and intuitive without the dumbing down of VB. The language for me. And I would recommend it to anyone else interested. BTW - There are actually areas in which .NET performs better. And it supports true language interoperability without middleware, unlike what COM attempts to do. And it's just plain old awesome! (I personally think it kicks Java in the nuts, but that's just me)

wwarnick

Fanboi.

xander
User avatar
NeoThermic
Introversion Staff
Introversion Staff
Posts: 6254
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2002 10:55 am
Location: ::1
Contact:

Postby NeoThermic » Sat Dec 02, 2006 1:39 pm

Assuming this isn't one of your blanket statements, lets pull this one apart, eh? :)


wwarnick wrote:As soon as frameworks are created for Mac and Linux, you'll be seeing a whole lot more of .NET.


The only way this'll ever be true is if Microsoft actually help and develop .net ability for the said platforms. Else you'll have to rely on things like Mono, which isn't as good as native support.

wwarnick wrote:But really, .NET reduces bugs


Lies. Bugs are mistakes by the programmer, a human factor. I can write flawled code in any language, .net included.

wwarnick wrote:shortens compile time


Compared to? Also note that compile time doesn't matter much, at all. It isn't like we're all running Gentoo and need to compile our applications frequently. The end user will never see a compile. Thus your point is invalid.

wwarnick wrote:reduces executable size


Ha! Yeah, for .net though, you need the .net runtimes, which 2.0 weighs in at a hefty 22.4 MB. So your application might be ~800KB vs a 1.2MB non-.net version, but at least the non .net version doesn't need a 22.4MB runtime.

wwarnick wrote:simplifies many previously tedious processes


Name some?

wwarnick wrote:reduces coding time significantly without any real decrease in power


Coding time can be better reduced by proper prototyping, coding styles and planning. You might save a few mins here or there by using tools that do things for you, but your time is better saved by proper development styles.

wwarnick wrote:BTW - There are actually areas in which .NET performs better.


Incidently you quielty ommit to name them. Care to?

wwarnick wrote:I personally think it kicks Java in the nuts, but that's just me


Oh cripes, don't get me started on Java... ;)

NeoThermic
User avatar
wwarnick
level5
level5
Posts: 1863
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:44 pm
Location: Rexburg, ID

Postby wwarnick » Sun Dec 03, 2006 5:48 am

To prevent confusion, the majority of my previous post was a comparison between .NET (C# mostly) and C++.

NeoThermic wrote:The only way this'll ever be true is if Microsoft actually help and develop .net ability for the said platforms.

I'm assuming they intend to. Correct me if I'm wrong.

NeoThermic wrote:Lies. Bugs are mistakes by the programmer, a human factor. I can write flawled code in any language, .net included.

What talent you have. You know what I meant.

NeoThermic wrote:Compared to? Also note that compile time doesn't matter much, at all. It isn't like we're all running Gentoo and need to compile our applications frequently. The end user will never see a compile. Thus your point is invalid.

(Compared to C++) A convenience for the programmer. This may not be major, but I happen to like it.

NeoThermic wrote:Ha! Yeah, for .net though, you need the .net runtimes, which 2.0 weighs in at a hefty 22.4 MB. So your application might be ~800KB vs a 1.2MB non-.net version, but at least the non .net version doesn't need a 22.4MB runtime.

wwarnick wrote:(not that that's a big issue)


NeoThermic wrote:
wwarnick wrote:simplifies many previously tedious processes


Name some?

GUI, memory management, security, porting to name a few. The fact that .NET saves time isn't even debated. The reduction in coding time is balanced by a reduction in performance. I don't think you'll argue that.

NeoThermic wrote:
wwarnick wrote:reduces coding time significantly without any real decrease in power


Coding time can be better reduced by proper prototyping, coding styles and planning. You might save a few mins here or there by using tools that do things for you, but your time is better saved by proper development styles.

Ah. And proper prototyping, coding styles, and planning cannot be done in .NET?

NeoThermic wrote:
wwarnick wrote:BTW - There are actually areas in which .NET performs better.


Incidently you quielty ommit to name them. Care to?

First off, native code on the whole is inarguably faster. However, though outweighed, there are a few (meaning a few) performance increases in .NET. .NET enables computer-specific optimizations, eliminates indirection to addresses known only at runtime, and has faster heap allocations. That's all I know offhand. There may be a few more, I don't know. Nevertheless, there aren't many. I never said .NET as a whole was faster. However, the performance reduction is very small, and for my purposes insignificant.

NeoThermic wrote:
wwarnick wrote:I personally think it kicks Java in the nuts, but that's just me


Oh cripes, don't get me started on Java... ;)

Meaning you like or dislike Java? Just in case, change my wording from "kicks Java in the nuts" to "I prefer C#".

I'm not sure whether to take your post as friendly discussion or on the defense. Either way, I hope this clears this up. I only meant to promote .NET as a Java programmer would promote Java and a Mac user would promote a Mac.

Speaking of Macs, I have yet to hear a Mac/PC comparison that has even verged on technical. The most valid point I've heard to date is that Mac's taskbar better satisfies Fitt's law. Please share any knowledge you have.

wwarnick

Return to “Mod Projects”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests