.com.unity Forums

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)
-   Dominions 2: The Ascension Wars (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=55)
-   -   OT: Flowers for the grave of MoM. (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=18875)

Lunaticus June 14th, 2004 06:39 PM

Re: OT: Flowers for the grave of MoM.
 
Thank you very much!

PvK June 14th, 2004 07:35 PM

Re: OT: Flowers for the grave of MoM.
 
I'm a programmer and I rather like Python, though I've only seriously used it for one project several years ago. It's extremely flexible about what it lets you do, and it offers strong cross-platform libraries to do all kinds of things.

It's extremely good for fast prototyping, or anything where execution speed isn't critical, but development speed is desired. The cross-platform aspect is great, too.

It was quite easy to learn and use. Also since it costs nothing, it doesn't hurt to give it a try.

PvK

Gandalf Parker June 14th, 2004 08:24 PM

Re: OT: Flowers for the grave of MoM.
 
RATS. EotFS was so recently without a publisher? Why didnt we get them signed on here?

Quote:


NEWS (updated 6-8-04)
Holistic Design Inc. Signs on to (snipped)

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Any others hanging out there waiting for a publisher? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ June 14, 2004, 19:25: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Taqwus June 14th, 2004 08:57 PM

Re: OT: Flowers for the grave of MoM.
 
Hm, I was under the impression that "Stars! Supernova" had publisher problems as well. I haven't checked their site for a long, long time however. For all I know, Mare Crisium dissolved already.

Gandalf Parker June 14th, 2004 10:21 PM

Re: OT: Flowers for the grave of MoM.
 
Yeah but they want a publisher who will do "advances". Pay them to work on finishing it.

I do think that Stars was a wonderful game. And I would LOVE to see the new one come out, but Im not sure Id want to put MY neck out that far to see it.

Pirateiam June 15th, 2004 03:18 AM

Re: OT: Flowers for the grave of MoM.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by PvK:
I'm a programmer and I rather like Python, though I've only seriously used it for one project several years ago. It's extremely flexible about what it lets you do, and it offers strong cross-platform libraries to do all kinds of things.

It's extremely good for fast prototyping, or anything where execution speed isn't critical, but development speed is desired. The cross-platform aspect is great, too.

It was quite easy to learn and use. Also since it costs nothing, it doesn't hurt to give it a try.

PvK

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The strong cross-platform libraries is what has interested me since I plan on using this ability quite liberally. I do have somewhat of a concern on execution speed. What have you experienced with execution speed. Comparable to Pascal or Perl? Do you have any references that you reccomend? My skill level I would say is moderate. I know mostly industrial automation Languages such as Ladder Logic, LISP, Pascal and Fortran. I play with C++ but I am stil self teaching myself.

Esben Mose Hansen June 15th, 2004 08:18 AM

Re: OT: Flowers for the grave of MoM.
 
As for execution speed, there are plenty of tests out there. I random one from google is here.

As for cross-platform and as long as you plan to distribute the executables, there are lot of choices, from C/C++ (with XP libraries) to Perl, Python and Ruby. A short breakdown:

C/C++: Nothing beats these beast for availbility of libraries; relatively hard to learn; unparalleled execution speed.

Perl/Python: The two by far most popular scripting Languages. Both offer excellent XP, large libraries, slow execution speed and fast development time. Python is "stricter" and more formal than Perl; otherwise the Languages are very similar in aim&spirit, so pick the one you like the most.

Ruby: Is relatively new. If you don't care about popularity and large libraries, this may be the ticket. It looks really, really cool but I have not yet had the pleasure.

Sheap June 15th, 2004 09:38 AM

Re: OT: Flowers for the grave of MoM.
 
Instead of learning C or C++, I recommend stabbing yourself in the head. It will be less painful and you will probably end up with a better program. Except if you are writing specialized software like hardware device drivers or a graphics rendering engine, or if you have to maintain a program that is already written in one of these Languages, there is not any good reason to use them. They are totally obsolete.

If you do have to maintain a program already written in C or C++, see my previous advice.

Curath June 15th, 2004 10:37 AM

Re: OT: Flowers for the grave of MoM.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by PrinzMegaherz:
Halfling Slingers of doom.

They owned nearly every standard unit in the game due to their luck. I love them :-)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana"> s it possible to get a Version of Master of Magic that works for windows xp? I'll check out that site Gandalf mentions.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">If that is what you whish, here you go: Dosbox

Emulates a complete computer that is capable of running most of the older games... I'm using it for Mom, Dungeon MAster and Star Control, also the Last one got some graphical errors
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Apologies for this very late offtopic reply.

Why run DM and SC (the second one I assume) in DosBox?
In case you didn't know:

Dungeon Master - Return to Chaos

PC remake of DM and CSB with minor enhancements. Currently at Version 0.28 but it's quite stable (only had a couple crashes playing through DM). Also coming up is a map editor so there may be new dungeons to explore in the future.

The Ur-Quan Masters

Remake of Star Control 2. Version 0.3 so far and it's somewhat buggy.

[ June 15, 2004, 15:34: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Graeme Dice June 15th, 2004 02:21 PM

Re: OT: Flowers for the grave of MoM.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Sheap:
They are totally obsolete.
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Which is, of course, a totally false statement, but don't mind. Keep on spreading that FUD.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:01 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.