Programming WitP

Programming WitP (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition

Message

Saso -> Programming WitP (4/18/2008 3:05:53 PM)
I'm just wondering... Which programming language do you using for WitP/AE?

BShaftoe -> RE: Programming WitP (4/18/2008 6:12:08 PM)
C++ most likely, methinks.

wdolson -> RE: Programming WitP (4/19/2008 12:54:18 AM)
C. It's a very old school program. Bill

Saso -> RE: Programming WitP (4/19/2008 1:36:51 PM)
quote: C. It's a very old school program. [X(] Thanks, but I have another question... Given that C isn't a object-oriented programming language, how do you have create the map?

jwilkerson -> RE: Programming WitP (4/19/2008 6:08:28 PM)
The map is created in a paint program. Actually we use a c++ complier (VS2005 for AE) but as Bill indicates there is very little "++" to the code.

Shark7 -> RE: Programming WitP (4/19/2008 6:14:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jwilkerson The map is created in a paint program. Actually we use a c++ complier (VS2005 for AE) but as Bill indicates there is very little "++" to the code. Basically its still based off of the Pacific War engine that was written over a decade ago? Is that why you are still using the older coding language?

jwilkerson -> RE: Programming WitP (4/19/2008 6:19:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shark7 quote: ORIGINAL: jwilkerson The map is created in a paint program. Actually we use a c++ complier (VS2005 for AE) but as Bill indicates there is very little "++" to the code. Basically its still based off of the Pacific War engine that was written over a decade ago? Is that why you are still using the older coding language? I'm not allowed to comment or the first part of the question - but I can say that AE is, of course, based on WITP and WITP does not use classes. That being said VS2005 is pretty current, I use that on most of my other (non-WITP-AE) projects, so I don't consider that "language" to be older. It is the coding style that is older. If we ever do a "from scratch" game then I'm sure this team at least, would use a class structure. I myself would vote for either c# (if Billy-ware) or j2ee (if scotty-ware).

Shark7 -> RE: Programming WitP (4/19/2008 6:26:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jwilkerson quote: ORIGINAL: Shark7 quote: ORIGINAL: jwilkerson The map is created in a paint program. Actually we use a c++ complier (VS2005 for AE) but as Bill indicates there is very little "++" to the code. Basically its still based off of the Pacific War engine that was written over a decade ago? Is that why you are still using the older coding language? I'm not allowed to comment or the first part of the question - but I can say that AE is, of course, based on WITP and WITP does not use classes. That being said VS2005 is pretty current, I use that on most of my other (non-WITP-AE) projects, so I don't consider that "language" to be older. It is the coding style that is older. If we ever do a "from scratch" game then I'm sure this team at least, would use a class structure. I myself would vote for either c# (if Billy-ware) or j2ee (if scotty-ware). So its not the language itself, but the way in which the language is used. I believe I understand it now. [:)]

Terminus -> RE: Programming WitP (4/19/2008 6:35:00 PM)
Well, that makes one of us...[&:][&:][&:][:D][:D][:D]

Midnight19D -> RE: Programming WitP (5/2/2008 6:40:55 PM)
I'm programming school right now, and the .Net platform I believe, as well as more than 60% of my classmates, is a better language than any of the Java Family. Fogive if i step on anyones toes with that statement, but i have found developement in C# to be easier, even when you dont use the visual editor. btw we use VS 2005/2008.

Terminus -> RE: Programming WitP (5/2/2008 7:06:40 PM)
Remember that AE is a RE-WRITE, so programmers are kinda restricted in what they can use.

niceguy2005 -> RE: Programming WitP (5/2/2008 7:57:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Midnight19D I'm programming school right now, and the .Net platform I believe, as well as more than 60% of my classmates, is a better language than any of the Java Family. Fogive if i step on anyones toes with that statement, but i have found developement in C# to be easier, even when you dont use the visual editor. btw we use VS 2005/2008. The choice of language has to fit the application. In this day and age, when processor speed and memory resources are virtually infinite the features offered by .Net are quite nice. However, there are still some application areas (such as aerospace) where processor speed and memory are far from infinite and .Net is not an efficient technology.

jwilkerson -> RE: Programming WitP (5/2/2008 10:37:03 PM)
"choice of language"!! :D I've been programming for longer than I will say - but I will say that "choosing the language" is not one of the things programmers much get to do in the real world .. I'd say I've choosen the language I would use on maybe 3 projects out of 1000. The language is usually already choosen by a predeccesor (as it ws on the AE project) or the "powers that be"! :) And do I like one more than the other - nah - most of them can do anything - some can do somethings easier than others - java, c#, c++ not much difference to me, mostly in the "vendor supplied classes" .. but they can all do the same things, they just spell them a bit differently.

BShaftoe -> RE: Programming WitP (5/4/2008 1:42:22 AM)
In any case, for any actual game, programming in anything else than C++ is like telling customers with old PCs: "go and buy a new rig". Just imagine WitP in Java and being executed on its actual minimum requirements. You'd have WitP in real time. [:D]

Grotius -> RE: Programming WitP (5/4/2008 2:16:50 AM)
quote: I myself would vote for either c# (if Billy-ware) or j2ee (if scotty-ware). Me too. I'm no expert, but people say that C# is only marginally slower than C++, and that one sees the difference primarily in big honking 3D games, not a 2D app like WITP. Some "actual games" have been released in C#, and more are on the way. I prefer working with C# myself, as I find I code faster with it and I make fewer mistakes.

bradfordkay -> RE: Programming WitP (5/4/2008 5:05:53 AM)
"Just imagine WitP in Java and being executed on its actual minimum requirements. You'd have WitP in real time." We pretty much do anyway. Chez and I have been very consistent with our game, and have played 17 months of game time in 15 months of real time - only slightly faster than real time!

wdolson -> RE: Programming WitP (5/4/2008 7:09:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Midnight19D I'm programming school right now, and the .Net platform I believe, as well as more than 60% of my classmates, is a better language than any of the Java Family. Fogive if i step on anyones toes with that statement, but i have found developement in C# to be easier, even when you dont use the visual editor. btw we use VS 2005/2008. quote: ORIGINAL: niceguy2005 The choice of language has to fit the application. In this day and age, when processor speed and memory resources are virtually infinite the features offered by .Net are quite nice. However, there are still some application areas (such as aerospace) where processor speed and memory are far from infinite and .Net is not an efficient technology. Anyplace where you have an embedded system (from aerospace, to the computers in your car, to your TV remote), resources are almost always scarce. Sometimes being as efficient as possible is absolutely critical. That was my world for many years. I've worked on phones, aircraft systems, home appliances, and other things. The situation with PCs as far as memory and processor power goes can make a programmer lazy. Depending on the language, so much is done for you. It may be my experience, but I do prefer languages that aren't too abstracted. Languages like Java, which are designed to be portable to any system are highly abstracted, assembly isn't abstrcted at all, while languages like C and C++ are kind of in the middle. I did a fair bit of assembly back in the day, but prefer C and C++ now. I can get under the hood if I have to, but most of the time I can be somewhat abstracted from the underlying system. Bill

jwilkerson -> RE: Programming WitP (5/4/2008 4:34:08 PM)
Well depends on what we mean when we say "c++" ... in the modern Billyware World ... c++, c#, etc. mean dotnet ... which means dotnet classes, which means differences are minimal and mostly superficial.

pompack -> RE: Programming WitP (5/4/2008 7:27:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wdolson quote: ORIGINAL: Midnight19D I'm programming school right now, and the .Net platform I believe, as well as more than 60% of my classmates, is a better language than any of the Java Family. Fogive if i step on anyones toes with that statement, but i have found developement in C# to be easier, even when you dont use the visual editor. btw we use VS 2005/2008. quote: ORIGINAL: niceguy2005 The choice of language has to fit the application. In this day and age, when processor speed and memory resources are virtually infinite the features offered by .Net are quite nice. However, there are still some application areas (such as aerospace) where processor speed and memory are far from infinite and .Net is not an efficient technology. Anyplace where you have an embedded system (from aerospace, to the computers in your car, to your TV remote), resources are almost always scarce. Sometimes being as efficient as possible is absolutely critical. That was my world for many years. I've worked on phones, aircraft systems, home appliances, and other things. The situation with PCs as far as memory and processor power goes can make a programmer lazy. Depending on the language, so much is done for you. ... Bill Absolutely. And the things that made me absolutely crazy when working in that world were the people who insisted on tracking code metrics, especially LOC/hr. I once worked for over three weeks to REMOVE a single line of code from an embedded inner loop; when monthly LOC/hr went negative it really drove the beancounters (aka "Process Pukes", I really have nothing against accountants [:D]) crazy

BShaftoe -> RE: Programming WitP (5/5/2008 6:13:24 PM)
quote: We pretty much do anyway. Chez and I have been very consistent with our game, and have played 17 months of game time in 15 months of real time - only slightly faster than real time! Yep, but that's because you have obligations outside the game. You've got a job (I hope!!), maybe wife, kids, and all those little hindrances that keep you to devoting all your life to the game. So most of the time, the computer does nothing. So let me reword the comparison: Just imagine WitP in Java and being executed on its actual minimum requirements in a computer versus computer game. You'd have WitP in real time. ;) It's a joke anyway. ;)

bradfordkay -> RE: Programming WitP (5/5/2008 7:06:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BShaftoe quote: We pretty much do anyway. Chez and I have been very consistent with our game, and have played 17 months of game time in 15 months of real time - only slightly faster than real time! Yep, but that's because you have obligations outside the game. You've got a job (I hope!!), maybe wife, kids, and all those little hindrances that keep you to devoting all your life to the game. So most of the time, the computer does nothing. So let me reword the comparison: Just imagine WitP in Java and being executed on its actual minimum requirements in a computer versus computer game. You'd have WitP in real time. ;) It's a joke anyway. ;) So was my comment... [;)]

BShaftoe -> RE: Programming WitP (5/6/2008 7:10:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bradfordkay So was my comment... [;)] D'oh! [sm=dizzy.gif]

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.734375