inverse42
|
|
« Reply #3780 on: December 21, 2012, 12:45:26 PM » |
|
WPF: WTF?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
QuadrupleA
|
|
« Reply #3781 on: December 21, 2012, 12:46:38 PM » |
|
Windows API. That is all.
It made sense in the 80's
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
kamac
|
|
« Reply #3782 on: December 21, 2012, 12:56:18 PM » |
|
Windows API. That is all.
It made sense in the 80's Why? You don't use Windows anylonger?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
QuadrupleA
|
|
« Reply #3783 on: December 21, 2012, 12:58:33 PM » |
|
It made sense in the 80's Why? You don't use Windows anylonger? The API. Its design made sense in the 80's.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
kamac
|
|
« Reply #3784 on: December 21, 2012, 01:01:39 PM » |
|
It made sense in the 80's Why? You don't use Windows anylonger? The API. Its design made sense in the 80's. Oh, you mean that It never made sense to me, though. I guess C# is our best bet for fully-windows graphical UI applications.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
s_l_m
|
|
« Reply #3785 on: December 21, 2012, 01:19:49 PM » |
|
Windows API. That is all.
Try programming windows applications in Assembly, I tried it when I was like 14. Never again.
|
|
|
Logged
|
Think happy thoughts.
|
|
|
ThemsAllTook
|
|
« Reply #3786 on: December 21, 2012, 02:33:07 PM » |
|
The Win32 C API is convoluted, full of seemingly unnecessarily-large structs, CONSTANTSANDTYPENAMESTHATLOOKLIKETHIS, and a lot of other nonsense, but I'd have to say it does a pretty good job for itself otherwise. Every time I've had some task I wanted to accomplish, I was able to find a supported way to do it, with adequate documentation helping me figure out how. That's more than I can say for almost any other system API I've used, even if they're more aesthetically appealing than Win32.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
impulse9
Guest
|
|
« Reply #3787 on: December 22, 2012, 08:17:20 AM » |
|
Windows API. That is all.
<3
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
pixhead
Guest
|
|
« Reply #3788 on: December 23, 2012, 03:24:04 AM » |
|
The Win32 C API is convoluted, full of seemingly unnecessarily-large structs, CONSTANTSANDTYPENAMESTHATLOOKLIKETHIS, and a lot of other nonsense, but I'd have to say it does a pretty good job for itself otherwise. Every time I've had some task I wanted to accomplish, I was able to find a supported way to do it, with adequate documentation helping me figure out how. That's more than I can say for almost any other system API I've used, even if they're more aesthetically appealing than Win32.
Apparently this. Everywhere I go online, I see a similar response. That the API is terrifyingly complicated, but elegantly designed... Programming in a nutshell basically.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
pixhead
Guest
|
|
« Reply #3789 on: December 23, 2012, 04:03:56 AM » |
|
SDL and OpenGL are jerking me around. For some reason, when I load bitmaps they are displaying a blue hue. I can't for the life of me find a solution online, they all use GL_BGR which isn't include in my opengl.h Re-ding-dang-donculous
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Ben_Hurr
|
|
« Reply #3790 on: December 23, 2012, 10:40:03 AM » |
|
Crippling indecision, oh how I love thee.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Ludophonic
|
|
« Reply #3791 on: December 23, 2012, 03:45:38 PM » |
|
Just what flaming hoops does a man need to jump through in order to create a win32 cursor from an image in memory also: #define GL_BGR 0x80E0 #define GL_BGRA 0x80E1
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
_Tommo_
|
|
« Reply #3792 on: December 23, 2012, 03:56:03 PM » |
|
more like
#include "glew.h"
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
pixhead
Guest
|
|
« Reply #3793 on: December 23, 2012, 04:04:43 PM » |
|
Just what flaming hoops does a man need to jump through in order to create a win32 cursor from an image in memory also: #define GL_BGR 0x80E0 #define GL_BGRA 0x80E1Thanks for those! However, I found a way to convert the pixel format before I turn it into a texture. I'll stick with that, just cause I'm proud that I did it myself
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Eendhoorn
Level 6
Quak
|
|
« Reply #3794 on: December 24, 2012, 05:06:44 PM » |
|
I have spend my entire evening trying to figure out how to move into the camera direction (yeah I'm new to 3D, matrices scare me). I moved to untiy3D to try and see how it goes there, and I figured it out in 5 minutes. Vector3 forward = gameObject.transform.TransformDirection(Vector3.forward); if(Input.GetKey(KeyCode.W)) { gameObject.transform.position += forward; }
Here is the code that I'm failing to get working, while it seems pretty identical to the unity code to me. (as3) var forward:Vector4 = camera.transform.transformVector(Vector4.FORWARD); if (keyboardManager.keyIsDown(Keyboard.W)) { //camera.transform.appendTranslation(forward.x / 100, 0, -forward.z / 100); var newpos:Vector4 = camera.transform.getTranslation().incrementBy(forward.scaleBy(-0.01)); camera.transform.translationX = newpos.x; camera.transform.translationZ = newpos.z; }
(source for the matrix and vector4 classes can be found here : https://github.com/aerys/minko/blob/master/src/aerys/minko/type/math/Matrix4x4.ashttps://github.com/aerys/minko/blob/master/src/aerys/minko/type/math/Vector4.as) I know this might not be the best place to ask a question, but I think it's absolutely peanuts for every programmer that has any experience with 3D
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Rusk
Level 1
|
|
« Reply #3795 on: December 24, 2012, 05:52:37 PM » |
|
I have spend my entire evening trying to figure out how to move into the camera direction (yeah I'm new to 3D, matrices scare me). Without you saying what kind of error you get, it's hard. You do move the minus sign around to different axes between the unity code, the commented line, and the rest but I suppose that's not what you mean.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Eendhoorn
Level 6
Quak
|
|
« Reply #3796 on: December 24, 2012, 06:24:09 PM » |
|
I have spend my entire evening trying to figure out how to move into the camera direction (yeah I'm new to 3D, matrices scare me). Without you saying what kind of error you get, it's hard. You do move the minus sign around to different axes between the unity code, the commented line, and the rest but I suppose that's not what you mean. No that's just the result of endless experimenting haha. Anyway, I just tried another engine (away3D) and noticed a "deltaTransformVector" function (as opposed to "transformVector" minus the delta. I have no idea what it does differently, but that did the trick. I can't look into the code for "deltaTransformVector" since it's a part of as3's native API though. Any explanation would still be appreciated! :D
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
mokesmoe
|
|
« Reply #3797 on: December 25, 2012, 12:07:34 AM » |
|
"Delta" usually means change so it probably means the function is relative and not absolute if that helps.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Crimsontide
|
|
« Reply #3798 on: December 25, 2012, 01:51:56 AM » |
|
I hate C++ meta-programming. Pure functional with zero bells or whistles or hell even a kazoo with the most awful syntax and even worse error reporting.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
« Reply #3799 on: December 26, 2012, 01:19:18 AM » |
|
wtf is with android fragments? It's pretty much 2-3 times the work to do... almost nothing.
Not using fragments is like sweeping things under the carpet -- a lot of dirty hacks and c&p.
Using fragments is like installing little robots under every carpet that lift all your furniture and carry it away when you want to sweep the room.
It's technically a lot of shit to learn. It's kinda impressive when you show (the technical side) to people. It's 'best practice', because you make sure you get everything (at least until the shiny new stuff gets deprecated again).
But it's a crapload of work that nobody notices. And it falls apart if you change certain things. And it's not handicap friendly. It takes on an attitude of 'fuck old/poor people, they don't buy my app'.
It's like one of those things that's become accepted as industry standard but doesn't actually add anything aside from coolness factor of meeting industry standards and being able to throw around the jargon and get a five figure salary because nobody else knows how to do it.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|