Jump to content
  • Advertisement


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

152 Neutral

About manuelb

  • Rank
  1. Quote:Original post by Palidine Well... both OpenGL and DirectX are actually implemented in the graphics card's hardware and drivers. So for the driver part sure, drivers are OS level; for the hardware part... I dunno; do you consider the hardware to be OS level or not? Do you even consider the hardwares representation to be part of OpenGL/DirectX or is it no longer part of the API once it's translated to silicon? -me I'm concerned with the software stuff. I think it's O.S. level, some people like to minimize O.S. responsibility, but I think it's O.S. even when not developed by the O.S. creator.
  2. i'm sorry, I mean O.S. Operating System. Sorry for the confusion.
  3. Hi, I'm wrinting some C.G. classes. Talking about software archtecture, I'm not sure if API componetns like directx and opengl can be considered S.O. level components, directX is very tied to the windows kernel, but I don't know what to think about OpenGL. What do you think?
  4. manuelb

    I can't ind wattcp

    Quote:Original post by Antheus Fifth link on google: http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/net/wattcp/ thank's I'm not very good on google :)
  5. Hi. I'm trying to find the wattcp lib, but i can't find it anymore and www.wattcp.com is not working. Can someone give me some help? And yes, i have already googled it.
  6. manuelb

    Auto-calculating tension at interpolation points

    take a look at bezier curve http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%C3%A9zier_curve it can be helpfull to your problem. I don't remeber how to do clickified links at gamedev :)
  7. manuelb

    Matrix library recommendations C/C++

    You could try ublas from boost C++.
  8. manuelb

    Do you believe in god?

    Most atheist coutries ever? the Old URSS and China. So I think atheism have nothing to do with freedom.
  9. manuelb

    evolutionism and the bible.

    Quote:Original post by mikeman Quote: First thing, for me it's obvious that Genesis uses metaphorical language, it is the truth, but it is metaphorical, for a simple reason, we would never understand it in the time it was written if it was scientific. Stop it, you're making sense! We can't have that here! Frankly, I too have never understood why God and Science are contradictory. I don't understand why people think the phrase "God created the world" couldn't mean that God create space and time(and 6 other dimensions) and gravitational constant and superstrings and strong nuclear force and electromagnetism and quantums and bound them all together so that events such as evolution and the creation of life could spawn out seamlessly, but instead everyone thinks that God created an incomplete, mechanistic material universe that needed his "correction" and "miracles" from time to time. In sort, I have never met anyone that told me what exactly is the problem with the idea that God created man through evolution. I have come to the conclusion that most people are stupid and just can't see the obvious and the reasonable. Nice to see that more people think like me. When I read about the Big Bang, I did not think "God did not created the world", I thought "Cool, God have style!"
  10. manuelb

    evolutionism and the bible.

    Quote:Original post by VanillaSnake21 I completely support the creationist (Bible) point of view. The Bible says that in the Beginning there was a Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. Science tells us that in the beginning there were vibrating strings and bubbles, that expanded into the current universe. I know so many people who are Christian but don't believe that God created them. God is amazing, he is all powerful so If he's mighty enough to perform other miracles, why do people have trouble believing that he could have created the world. It is written in the Bible - Quote: orginal by Apostle Paul For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctorine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. - Timothy 4:3-5 I think I forgot to point out that I believe that God create every thing, me, the world, the evolution process. It's like a painting being painted; if you could not see the painter, all would you see would be peaces of paint appearing. The physics phenomena are like the small pieces of paint. The painting does not have to appear like magic to someone believe the it was created by a painter, and the processes used by the painter is the painter business.
  11. manuelb

    evolutionism and the bible.

    My coworkers started a discussion about creationism x evolutionism and the bible. Arguing that evolutionism is opposed to bible. I found it funny; when I was very young I thought about it, find that the bible is very coherent with evolutionism and never thought about it again. I did not realize that there is so much discussions about it. Well I will write what a thought when I was a child and you can say if I'm crazy. First thing, for me it's obvious that Genesis uses metaphorical language, it is the truth, but it is metaphorical, for a simple reason, we would never understand it in the time it was written if it was scientific. The man creation: 1) Science: Life started with a very simple form, probably generated with minerals and water. Bible: the man was created from mud (mud is minerals + water) so it's ok with science. 2) Science: This form of life evaluated until homo-sapiens. Bible: The man was modeled from mud. Quite good analogy, with you imagine the mud being modeled, and a form of life evolving its quite similar. 3) Well, we create culture, we have conscience, we crate things. Animals can't to do nothing comparable to what we do (For good or bad). Bible: The breath of God (after it has been modeled): than it became homo-sapiens. For me it always made sense.
  12. manuelb

    Abuse of power? or just desserts?

    Quote:Original post by Drigovas I recently discovered that somebody who was a real pain for me in highschool uses a service that I function as an administrator on. I must say, it would put a smile on my face to toy with him and treat him badly from my position of power. But the professional in me is telling me that I should not use my position of power and authority for personal entertainment. He was a jerk then, and he's a jerk now, but he hasn't broken any rules in place. So far I've done nothing, and I'm certain that this person does not realize who I am. I'm not likely going to do anything either [half because I'm a wimp, and half because I shouldn't be carrying around those sort of grudges], but it got me to thinking .... I wouldn't get in any sort of trouble, regardless of how I abused this person. It's sheerly an ethical question. What would the rest of you do? Is it wrong to use positions of authority to torment those who truly deserve it? Is it being a bully, or being karma's hand in action? Yes. It is bully and it is wrong. Quote: Certainly it makes a difference what kind of authority you hold, and what degree of punishment you would inflict on them, but is any acceptable? No. It's not aceptable. Quote: How about banning an old enemy from a free CS server [or something else which they can just go to another of] Does it make a difference if they have paid for the service that you would be pulling out from under them? What are your opinions? Why would money make any diference? It's just a case of ethics. 99% of world problems are caused by people using theyre power in selfish ways, and it starts with little things. You you do this you will be as bad as he was when in high school.
  13. manuelb


    Quote:Original post by Nathan Baum The people living in the locality are to prevent you from doing that. uh? So, it's not anarchism anymore. People in the locality get organized to prevent you from doing something the most people fill is worg. THIS is a democratic state. How can you enforce anarchism? If you restrict the right of someone to not be anarchist, then you have rules, then you need I kind of police of army to prevent people to change the system from anarchism to something diferent, and then it's not anarchism enymore. I think anarchism is 100% paradoxal. If you do not enforce it, people will naturaly get organized in states (like happend in pre-history). If you enforce it, how could it be anarchism?
  14. manuelb

    Do you believe in god?

    yes. the reasons: 1)My mother and father told me to. 2)I fill good this way. 3)A realy like all of Jesus ideias about society.
  15. Epik timer: http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/EpikTimer
  • Advertisement

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

GameDev.net is your game development community. Create an account for your GameDev Portfolio and participate in the largest developer community in the games industry.

Sign me up!