This topic is locked
I didn't manipulate anything...
You should of just told us you program for OS/2 WARP! That would have been somewhat more impressive than your Jersey Shore OS.
OH TEH NOS!
1
I think all programmers should know machine code...
Started by AndyWonHarglesis, May 18 2011 01:44 AM
75 replies to this topic
Sponsor:
#62 Members - Reputation: 117
Posted 18 May 2011 - 04:25 AM
You have already posted so much verifiably wrong information in this thread (like that horrible PS3 brainfart) that in accordance with Occam's razor the story that you have absolutely no clue seems to be the far more likely explanation.
No, no, no. I'm sure he has a perfectly good and completely unverifiable explanation for everything!
#63 Members - Reputation: 1397
Posted 18 May 2011 - 04:32 AM
Yeah, but now I have finally reached my threshold.
Oh. No. Wait. I read about the Xenio thingummi computer and its assembler. Wasn't that the one which had an "rsn" opcode (= run snakes)? Of course it's easy to write assembler when the processor you are working on has the desired functionality burned it.
Note: one of the above paragraphs contains sarcasm. It is left as an exercise to the reader to find out which one it is.
Oh. No. Wait. I read about the Xenio thingummi computer and its assembler. Wasn't that the one which had an "rsn" opcode (= run snakes)? Of course it's easy to write assembler when the processor you are working on has the desired functionality burned it.
Note: one of the above paragraphs contains sarcasm. It is left as an exercise to the reader to find out which one it is.
#65 Members - Reputation: 117
Posted 18 May 2011 - 04:37 AM
Yeah, but now I have finally reached my threshold.
Oh. No. Wait. I read about the Xenio thingummi computer and its assembler. Wasn't that the one which had an "rsn" opcode (= run snakes)? Of course it's easy to write assembler when the processor you are working on has the desired functionality burned it.
Note: one of the above paragraphs contains sarcasm. It is left as an exercise to the reader to find out which one it is.
It's coming back to me now. Ah yes, Xenio, rsn. Not much of an accomplishment, really. Not worth bragging about, certainly!
#66 Members - Reputation: 154
Posted 18 May 2011 - 04:44 AM
I won't give a decisive opinion on the subject of this thread because I'm not knowledeable enough, but I would like to dicuss the issue sensibly without all this flaming, and without it being spread over two threads. Why are people flaming this kid in what is a semi-professional environment? Why not just express disagreement and rate his posts down? Surely that would be enough to ensure people take his posts with a (large) pinch of salt?
Anyway, if I'm not mistaken, the general subject is about comparing assembly to high level languages and APIs which, like almost any subject, I think is a reasonable subject to discuss. My attempt to contribute to the discussion follows.
I've been trying to find a list of great games written in assembly but I cannot. As far as I know the last great game written in assembly was Frontier Elite by David Braben. The GDC Vault isn't loading for me at the moment, so I can't link the video, but I very much enjoyed Braben's Classic Game Postmortem on Elite at GDC. It struck me how immensly intelligent he is. But I think the AFAIK up till now unparalled achievements of that game are more due to his genius and use of procedural generation than due to his use of assembly. This is reenforced by recent attempts to expand on the concept of the game in 3D graphics meeting today's standards, using higher level tools, which have been succesful in principle but not yet fully realised due to the enormity of the work undertaken, assembly doesn't even come into the reasons. It is probably true that the Elite series would have been impossible had it not been written in assembly, but its also probably true that's only because of having to squeeze the required performance out of very limited machines.
Also to the OP, you should bear in mind that DirectX provides a necessary layer so that the programmers code is compatible with a wide range of graphics cards. AFAIK in assembly one would have to code different code for each graphics card... I don't know if something analogous is true for CPUs and RAM but I wouldn't be surprised. Given the effectively infinite variety of system configs apparent in todays PC market I suspect that renders PC game development in assembly effectively impossible, though probably still possible and perhaps even desirable in the hardware limited single configuration console market.
[EDIT] Question: Are all PS3 games written in assembly? Been trying to research that but having no luck.
Anyway, if I'm not mistaken, the general subject is about comparing assembly to high level languages and APIs which, like almost any subject, I think is a reasonable subject to discuss. My attempt to contribute to the discussion follows.
I've been trying to find a list of great games written in assembly but I cannot. As far as I know the last great game written in assembly was Frontier Elite by David Braben. The GDC Vault isn't loading for me at the moment, so I can't link the video, but I very much enjoyed Braben's Classic Game Postmortem on Elite at GDC. It struck me how immensly intelligent he is. But I think the AFAIK up till now unparalled achievements of that game are more due to his genius and use of procedural generation than due to his use of assembly. This is reenforced by recent attempts to expand on the concept of the game in 3D graphics meeting today's standards, using higher level tools, which have been succesful in principle but not yet fully realised due to the enormity of the work undertaken, assembly doesn't even come into the reasons. It is probably true that the Elite series would have been impossible had it not been written in assembly, but its also probably true that's only because of having to squeeze the required performance out of very limited machines.
Also to the OP, you should bear in mind that DirectX provides a necessary layer so that the programmers code is compatible with a wide range of graphics cards. AFAIK in assembly one would have to code different code for each graphics card... I don't know if something analogous is true for CPUs and RAM but I wouldn't be surprised. Given the effectively infinite variety of system configs apparent in todays PC market I suspect that renders PC game development in assembly effectively impossible, though probably still possible and perhaps even desirable in the hardware limited single configuration console market.
[EDIT] Question: Are all PS3 games written in assembly? Been trying to research that but having no luck.
A selection of my projects: Interactive Ray Tracer [W.I.P] , GPU based Rendering [W.I.P]
#67 Members - Reputation: 117
Posted 18 May 2011 - 04:52 AM
I wouldn't call any of these comments flaming. This is and has always been a thread created for the sole purpose of trolling. It's nonsensical and should not be taken seriously, anywhere.
This thread went out of of scope a long time ago. We should just let it destruct already.
This thread went out of of scope a long time ago. We should just let it destruct already.
#68 Members - Reputation: 544
Posted 18 May 2011 - 04:54 AM
Does anyone live in Jersey here? I'd like to get a copy of this XENIO 12 BEST, because the current OS I'm using is holding back my multi-core rig.
Latest project: Sideways Racing on the iPad
#69 Banned - Reputation: 356
Posted 18 May 2011 - 04:54 AM
I wouldn't call any of these comments flaming. This is and has always been a thread created for the sole purpose of trolling. It's nonsensical and should not be taken seriously, anywhere.
This thread went out of of scope a long time ago. We should just let it destruct already.
Good catch on the fake screenshot btw
I like the Walrus best.
#70 Members - Reputation: 1397
Posted 18 May 2011 - 04:55 AM
I won't give a decisive opinion on the subject of this thread because I'm not knowledeable enough, but I would like to dicuss the issue sensibly without all this flaming, and without it being spread over two threads. Why are people flaming this kid in what is a semi-professional environment? Why not just express disagreement and rate his posts down? Surely that would be enough to ensure people take his posts with a (large) pinch of salt?
With the possible exception of my last bit of sarcasm I do not think I have actually flamed him and actively tried to preserve the idea of "reasonable doubt" as long as I could and giving him the possibility to still proof himself.
Anyway, if I'm not mistaken, the general subject is about comparing assembly to high level languages and APIs which, like almost any subject, I think is a reasonable subject to discuss.
A reasonable discussion was attempted at the beginning (with a few isolated incidents). Nevertheless, the progress of the discussion has shown that Andy has neither the ability nor the understanding and just kept adding wrong and twisted looks-like-facts. Whether this is because he is too stupid, too clueless and arrogant or a troll is up to everyone for him/herself. My bet is on troll.
In my experience, adding actual meaningful discussions to a such infested thread is counterproductive as the people who would benefit most from it are the most likely to take in dangerous misinformation spilled by the infestor. If you truly have a desire to deliberate the topic, I would suggest making a new thread in a couple of days when the immediate threat of re-infestation has dropped.
#71 Members - Reputation: 154
Posted 18 May 2011 - 05:05 AM
This thread went out of of scope a long time ago. We should just let it destruct already.
With the possible exception of my last bit of sarcasm I do not think I have actually flamed him and actively tried to preserve the idea of "reasonable doubt" as long as I could and giving him the possibility to still proof himself.
In my experience, adding actual meaningful discussions to a such infested thread is counterproductive as the people who would benefit most from it are the most likely to take in dangerous misinformation spilled by the infestor. If you truly have a desire to deliberate the topic, I would suggest making a new thread in a couple of days when the immediate threat of re-infestation has dropped.
Allright fair enough. I may start one in a couple of days to discuss what I do think is an interesting subject when its calmed down here. But woah does this thread go fast xD It seems to have struck a resonating chord.
BTW, I wasn't accusing anyone in particular of flaming, just commenting on what seemed to me to be lots of flaming going on in the thread in general (which is unsual around here). I didn't mean to take sides or anything. I don't think the OP's approach has been good, but he's either a troll or a kid so meh.
A selection of my projects: Interactive Ray Tracer [W.I.P] , GPU based Rendering [W.I.P]
#72 Members - Reputation: 102
Posted 18 May 2011 - 05:14 AM
This comment might be off topic a bit... but well, I visit 4chan very often. And this guy was obviously trolling.
But then again, falling for an obvious troll is also a trolling technique in 4chan!
so I don't know who's trolling who anymore. That's it
But then again, falling for an obvious troll is also a trolling technique in 4chan!
so I don't know who's trolling who anymore. That's it
#73 Members - Reputation: 1397
Posted 18 May 2011 - 05:23 AM
This comment might be off topic a bit... but well, I visit 4chan very often. And this guy was obviously trolling.
But then again, falling for an obvious troll is also a trolling technique in 4chan!
so I don't know who's trolling who anymore. That's it
There wasn't really much else to do. First, I was doing something that gave me a few free minutes every now and then. Second, if you let attitudes like just lying around uncommented you risk someone actually believing them to be true, especially if they are new and impressionable. There is actually people around who believe attitudes like he portrayed with similar faulty reasoning. That would not be a problem except sometimes we have to work with people (or their code) like that. And those are usually the times where garbageman sounds like a reasonable career change.
The other option would of course have been for a mod to ban him. But I have seen obvious ad-spam sitting around for half a day after reporting it, so I was not about to put my eggs in that basket.
#74 Members - Reputation: 117
Posted 18 May 2011 - 05:23 AM
This comment might be off topic a bit... but well, I visit 4chan very often. And this guy was obviously trolling.
But then again, falling for an obvious troll is also a trolling technique in 4chan!
so I don't know who's trolling who anymore. That's it
>4chan
inb4 trolls trolling trolls and image macros
#75 Members - Reputation: 3827
Posted 18 May 2011 - 05:29 AM
First of all, take 100 lines: "using less memory does not make your program faster or more efficient".
There are plenty of real world cases where using more memory is orders of magnitude faster. You might want to cache objects or calculation results for faster retrieval, you might want to align memory or use format sizes that are more appropriate for your platform or architecture.
Secondly, take another 100 lines: "modern operating systems do not allow programs to directly access the hardware".
This is as true of assembly language as it is of any higher level language. You may think you're doing so, but you're not. The kernel and/or HAL is performing the direct hardware access through the driver, you are not. You are not accessing actual physical memory, you are not accessing the actual physical disk, you are not accessing anything physical. That layer is still there and your program cannot bypass it.
Oddly enough, I agree with you in the sense that a programmer should definitely know something of what's going on behind the scenes; that way you can tune your program to work more efficiently with the way things really are. But language considerations are largely irrelevant with respect to that. You may think you're more 'ardkore for writing a program in assembly, but prepare to have the rug pulled from under your feet when C and a compiler wallop it for performance. (Just like C# and .NET can wallop C for performance under the right circumstances).
There are plenty of real world cases where using more memory is orders of magnitude faster. You might want to cache objects or calculation results for faster retrieval, you might want to align memory or use format sizes that are more appropriate for your platform or architecture.
Secondly, take another 100 lines: "modern operating systems do not allow programs to directly access the hardware".
This is as true of assembly language as it is of any higher level language. You may think you're doing so, but you're not. The kernel and/or HAL is performing the direct hardware access through the driver, you are not. You are not accessing actual physical memory, you are not accessing the actual physical disk, you are not accessing anything physical. That layer is still there and your program cannot bypass it.
Oddly enough, I agree with you in the sense that a programmer should definitely know something of what's going on behind the scenes; that way you can tune your program to work more efficiently with the way things really are. But language considerations are largely irrelevant with respect to that. You may think you're more 'ardkore for writing a program in assembly, but prepare to have the rug pulled from under your feet when C and a compiler wallop it for performance. (Just like C# and .NET can wallop C for performance under the right circumstances).
It appears that the gentleman thought C++ was extremely difficult and he was overjoyed that the machine was absorbing it; he understood that good C++ is difficult but the best C++ is well-nigh unintelligible.
#76 Staff - Reputation: 8903
Posted 18 May 2011 - 05:47 AM
I'm closing this topic -- if anyone wants to seriously discuss the subject matter at hand you may start a new topic to do so.
- Jason Astle-Adams.
From my blog: 20 ways to advertise your game | What next? Intermediate to advanced C++
How to make games WITHOUT programming | 4 reasons you aren't a successful indie developer
