Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

dsm1891

Member Since 31 Mar 2013
Offline Last Active Today, 12:14 AM

#5292271 maybe it could, possibly, this pass, do THIS sort of thing, for now

Posted by dsm1891 on 18 May 2016 - 07:30 AM

Do you have a producer or project manager, as well as the designer? I'd probably get cranky too, and go ask the producer whether we're prototyping / exploring, or working towards a known target / deadline :P

That kind of weak design is basically asking you to do the designing for them... which can be fine, if you know that's what you're supposed to be doing. I've worked on games where the programmers have knowingly been given only broad strokes and have been responsible for all the fine details, and in one case they developed new genre-defining gameplay systems. So it can be good to have the people with the power of implementation and iteration to have ownership over parts of the design... as long as they know they've got that responsibility. In other situation, the producer might be pissed that the programmers are faffing about in exploration/iteration mode, and the designer is wanking onto a page while a milestone deadline looms overhead...

No producer (yet, may hopefully change)

 

These ARE first pass, so it is, in a way prototyping. However, I would much rather be told what the first implementation should do.

 

For instance I Just asked the designer, "how should this be implemented the options are , A,B or C" to which the reply I got was "Yes, any of them". It seems the designer is afraid of commitment. Previously I have communicated verbally to him, which turned out to be a disaster.

 

I asked about X feature which I was to implement and he described the feature with some ambiguity. I thought fine, I can just do the obvious path. For example, I was to implement the character throwing a ball. It seems obvious to me, that when the ball is thrown, it is thrown with some force and is effected by gravity, has some sort of friction and restoration. After implementing it, I was told it was "just wrong" and that it would "obviously" travel in a straight line, not effected by gravity. 

 

Yesterday I questioned him (again verbally) about something else, and resolved the ambiguities. But today he when questioned about something else he contradicted himself.  

 

I am fine with things changing, but changing your idea of how something works day by day is frustrating. My idea how it should be is: Design it one way, play test, if it works great if not change it.

 

After the first instance of the ambiguities and my restricted freedoms (obviously the designer and I, don't share common ideas) I have stopped querying him face to face, instead I use the task manager comment system. So atleast I can refer to things he has said in the past on 'why I made it which ever way'

 

 

And before anyone asks we don't have a GDD *(or atleast one I can view)

 

and yes this is scrum, kinda, not really though :/




#5277589 Note to self

Posted by dsm1891 on 23 February 2016 - 05:50 AM

I almost deleted all .png's from my C drive once. That was a scary day at work. :)




#5276598 They called me crazy!

Posted by dsm1891 on 18 February 2016 - 10:19 AM

washu wrote me this :)

struct beufint_t {
public:
    beufint_t () : t(et::n), u(0) {}
    beufint_t (bool b) : t(et::b), b(b) {}
    beufint_t (float f) : t(et::f), f(f) {}
    beufint_t (int i) : t(et::i), i(i) {}
    beufint_t (unsigned u) : t(et::u), u(u) {}
    
    operator bool () const { return t == et::b ? b : false; }
    operator int () const { return t == et::i ? i : 0; }
    operator float () const { return t == et::f ? f : 0; }
    operator unsigned () const { return t == et::u ? u : 0; }
    operator void const * () const { return t != et::n ? this : 0; }

    bool operator () (bool) const { return t == et::b; }
    bool operator () (int) const { return t == et::i; }
    bool operator () (float) const { return t == et::f; }
    bool operator () (unsigned) const { return t == et::u; }
private:
    enum class et {
        b,
        f,
        i,
        u,
        n
    };
    
    union {
        bool b;
        float f;
        int i;
        unsigned u;
    };
    
    et t;
};



#5276142 They called me crazy!

Posted by dsm1891 on 17 February 2016 - 10:24 AM

tW41PnI.png

Ladies and gentle men, I bring to you, the Binteger (bool + int).




#5265282 Why didn't somebody tell me?

Posted by dsm1891 on 07 December 2015 - 11:02 AM

I always thought that his icon

tj1pGz9.png

was a carrot.

 

I just realised its a

 

Spoiler




#5264896 Why didn't somebody tell me?

Posted by dsm1891 on 04 December 2015 - 12:54 PM

Cats. They are not dogs.


#5252037 Convincing AntiVirsus, im not a virus

Posted by dsm1891 on 13 September 2015 - 08:44 AM

I think it is a little silly how Deep shield doesn't flag for VS09 applications, and even sillier that their (Avasts) official advice is "if you compile programs, don't use it".

 

 

The full extent of what happened is a combination of Deep shield false flagging the app as malware, andNot running the app as Admin on another PC (or the code I tested on the other pc ) or that on creation of the app it was flagged as malware and hence would not run on another pc with a different AV - don't know if that is a thing 




#5251916 Convincing AntiVirsus, im not a virus

Posted by dsm1891 on 12 September 2015 - 12:11 PM

Apparently this is a known issue with avast and vs13. Turns out avast deep shield was, atleast a part of the problem.
https://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=139935.0


#5251765 Convincing AntiVirsus, im not a virus

Posted by dsm1891 on 11 September 2015 - 01:11 PM

 

As it turns out, running on my Work PC as admin I was able to write to files. However if I run as admin at home, I do not get an output

I think at this point, we can safely assume your PC is hosed in some way.

Are you willing to uninstall that anti-virus entirely, to see if that makes a difference? And then reinstall it afterwards, and test again?

 

I have come this far. Will update after this.




#5251744 Convincing AntiVirsus, im not a virus

Posted by dsm1891 on 11 September 2015 - 10:15 AM

what directory and file name did you try this time?

 

do you need me to create a new console project, and send you a test exe, source, solution file, etc?

 

the exe would test your C runtime, AV, and UAC. the project files would test your compiler install.

 

 

 


Mobile Developer at PawPrint Games ltd.
(Not "mobile" as in I move around a lot, but as in phones, mobile phone developer)
(Although I am mobile. no, not as in a babies mobile, I move from place to place)
(Not "place" as in fish, but location.)

 

sounds like Mr Kimball from Green Acres - well, not exactly like him - he usually talked about crops, not phones, unless it was a phonecrop - or was it a cropphone? Anyway - good luck fishing for your mobile baby!  <g>.

WELL, im glad to know atleast one person has read (and appreciated) my signature.

 

As it turns out, running on my Work PC as admin I was able to write to files. However if I run as admin at home, I do not get an output




#5251606 Convincing AntiVirsus, im not a virus

Posted by dsm1891 on 10 September 2015 - 02:25 PM

Redownloaded VS and the Redistributables to no effect




#5251572 Convincing AntiVirsus, im not a virus

Posted by dsm1891 on 10 September 2015 - 12:05 PM

Thanks for your replies, I will reinstall vs13ce, if that doesn't work I might take ypu up on your offer Norman

Thanks


#5251286 Convincing AntiVirsus, im not a virus

Posted by dsm1891 on 09 September 2015 - 01:30 AM

 

TCHAR appData[MAX_PATH];
if (SUCCEEDED(SHGetFolderPath(NULL,
    CSIDL_DESKTOPDIRECTORY | CSIDL_FLAG_CREATE,
    NULL,
    SHGFP_TYPE_CURRENT,
    appData))
    wcout << appData << endl;
 That little piece of code is already very suspicious in itself... 

This code is not the question here. This code works! If AV is off. Blocked if on. I have tried countless methods.

The problem isn't what,where,how I'm outputting. I have changed all 3 multiple times with no effect. AV blocks the program from writing to files.

 

--

 

As people seem so adamant on critiquing my code. Please do feel free to post your code that outputs files on your machine. But I am almost positive it will fail.




#5251203 Convincing AntiVirsus, im not a virus

Posted by dsm1891 on 08 September 2015 - 03:02 PM

We had to change the name of a exe from Updater.exe to prevent it being blocked. Hilarious really.

Name doesn't matter, I have tried so many things sad.png

 

one (of many) example programs that does not work:

#include <iostream>
#include <windows.h>
#include <fstream>
#include <direct.h>
#include <shlobj.h>
#include <sstream>
#include <tchar.h>
using namespace std;

int main()
{
        ofstream file;
        TCHAR appData[MAX_PATH];
        if (SUCCEEDED(SHGetFolderPath(NULL,
                CSIDL_DESKTOPDIRECTORY | CSIDL_FLAG_CREATE,
                NULL,
               SHGFP_TYPE_CURRENT,
                appData)))

               wcout << appData << endl;

       std::basic_ostringstream<TCHAR> file_path;
       file_path << appData << _TEXT("\\filename.txt");
 
      file.open(file_path.str().c_str());
      file << "hello\n";
      file.close();
        return 0;

}




#5251188 Convincing AntiVirsus, im not a virus

Posted by dsm1891 on 08 September 2015 - 12:53 PM

I will try that.

I am not sure of another way to write the data from rapidjson I just create a string from the prettywriter and output that string

 

--

 

Again, it does not matter the method of writing to a file ( I have tried 4/5 different ways) or what I write to a file, nor the file format. AV always blocks the output when compiled in VS13CE. All from a blank project, out putting to documents, desktop or temp with absolute path with forward slash or two back slash. People have given me code which works for them, however coming from me it does not output.






PARTNERS