Tool: DEFCON ModSuite [BETA]

[wwarnick]

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.

[NeoThermic]

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

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

Code: Select all

/* must fix accuracy */

NeoThermic

[denzil]

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]

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?

[zach]

So true, I could help code if it was C#, such a nicer platform on .NET

And so portable! ... No, wait ...

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]

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?

[prophile]

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?

And so portable! ... No, wait ...

Frankly it's so full of windows-isms that changing to C# would have very little difference on portability anyway.

[zach]

GPL... *sigh*

When will you people learn?

I'm not used to releasing applications. What would you've suggested?

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 ).

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

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

[Kuth]

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]

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.

[zach]

An improved version will hopefully be available in the very near future.

Thanks to Faxmachinen, mind you

[wwarnick]

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

[xander]

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

[NeoThermic]

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

simplifies many previously tedious processes

Name some?

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.

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

Incidently you quielty ommit to name them. Care to?

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

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

NeoThermic

[wwarnick]

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

(not that that's a big issue)

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.

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?

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.

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