Strategy Game Collaboration

Experimental RTS/Space sim Collaborative Coding Project.
The goal is to design a game with structure/settings/balance of Starcraft and scale of Eve Online(i.e. huge space battles, space empires,etc).
Though this wouldn't stop anyone from contributing code/feedback/criticism, i'll be coordinating the project.
All code/ideas should be posted in this and subsequent threads which i'll start as needed.
step #1: We will collaboratively create a name for our project.
Each suggestion must explain why this name fits the project and why its better then any other generic name.

>>436 DirectX is a runtime, OpenGL is a runtime, libc is a runtime. There is no way to make this game without installing runtimes.
Don't try to blur the distinction between APIs which are installed in OS for all programs(in 99% case there are already there) and Runtimes which benefit only specific class of programs. 
The main point: I don't have to install OpenGL or DirectX with each new program which uses them.


_________________________________________________
http://xs135.xs.to/xs135/09042/av922.jpg
Refusal to believe until proof is given is a rational position; denial of all outside of our own limited experience is absurd.

>>436 DurectX is a roonteeme-a, OopenGL is a roonteeme-a, leebc is a roonteeme-a. Bork Bork Bork! Zeere-a is nu vey tu meke-a thees geme-a veethuoot instelleeng roonteemes. Bork Bork Bork!
Dun't try tu bloor zee deestincshun betveee EPIs vheech ere-a instelled in OoS fur ell prugrems(in 99% cese-a zeere-a ere-a elreedy zeere) und Roonteemes vheech beneffeet oonly speceeffic cless ooff prugrems. 
Zee meeen pueent: I dun't hefe-a tu instell OopenGL oor DurectX veet iech noo prugrem vheech uses zeem. Bork Bork Bork!


_________________________________________________
http://xs141.xs.to/xs141/09303/av992393.jpg
Reffoosel tu beleeefe-a unteel pruuff is geefee is a reshunel puseeshun; deneeel ooff ell ooootseede-a ooff oooor oovn leemited ixpereeence-a is ebsoord.

>>437 Thus Lisp remains disqualified.
>>440 Large projects can be compiled the same way, except the main.c file will have more #includes
and gcc will be invoked with more -llib parameters.


____________________________________________
http://xs135.xs.to/xs135/09042/av922.jpg
After a long period of slumber comes a moment of awakening. Then thought frees herself from the chains with which those interested - rulers, lawyers, clerics - have carefully enwound her.

>>437 Thoos Leesp remeeens deesqooeliffied. Bork Bork Bork!
>>440 Lerge-a prujects cun be-a cumpeeled zee seme-a vey, ixcept zee meeen.c feele-a veell hefe-a mure-a #incloodes
und gcc veell be-a infuked veet mure-a -lleeb peremeters. Bork Bork Bork!


____________________________________________
http://xs141.xs.to/xs141/09303/av992393.jpg
Effter a lung pereeud ooff sloomber cumes a mument ooff evekeneeng. Bork Bork Bork! Zeen thuooght frees herselff frum zee cheeens veet vheech thuse-a interested - roolers, levyers, clereecs - hefe-a cereffoolly invuoond her.

>>441
see >>439
There isn't any difference between a runtime and a normal library. The only difference you can argue about is if they are installed by default or not. Do you know that at least on Windows, you can drop the dll in the same directory as the exe, link against it, and it would work? Go get some real games, and look at their directories, how many dlls do you see for each? Do those dlls make the game any worse in any way?

I can't see your project getting anywhere, if you are arguing about such insignificant problems.

>>441
What you're not getting is that there *is* no distinction. They are all linked at run time.

Even if libc is installed in every Linux system, how does that benefit you? You don't know exactly where it is, what it's called, or whether the local version is compatible with the version the system that compiled the binary was using. If you didn't link statically libc to the binary then it's basically unrannable anywhere else.

Other than the OS API, you can't depend on anything being there.

>>443
The reason ECL doesn't distribute binaries is because it assumes you have a C compiler. It generates C files for you to compile with it, why would you have a problem compiling the compiler first?

>>439 That was before DirectX 9.0/OpenGL2.0,development has slowed down considerably and
 MS tries desperately to push new versions on programmers(including it with Vista/7).



____________________________________
http://xs135.xs.to/xs135/09042/av922.jpg
Ladies and gentlemen, distinguished colleagues, after extensive biological and anatomical testing, I regret to announce that the evidence we have is inconclusive. This thing may or may not be human.

>>439 Thet ves beffure-a DurectX 9.0/OopenGL2.0,defelupment hes slooed doon cunseederebly und
 MS treees desperetely tu poosh noo ferseeuns oon prugremmers(incloodeeng it veet Feesta/7). Bork Bork Bork!



____________________________________
http://xs141.xs.to/xs141/09303/av992393.jpg
Ledeees und gentlemee, deestingooished culleegooes, effter ixtenseefe-a beeulugicel und unetumeecel testeeng, I regret tu unnuoonce-a thet zee ifeedence-a ve-a hefe-a is incunclooseefe-a. Bork Bork Bork! Thees theeng mey oor mey nut be-a hoomun.

>>447 ECL is not a valid compiler. Its at best a language translator  



_________________________________
http://xs135.xs.to/xs135/09042/av922.jpg
Scientific theories are judged by the coherence they lend to our natural experience and the simplicity with which they do so.

>>447 ICL is nut a feleed cumpeeler. Bork Bork Bork! Its et best a lungooege-a trunsletur  



_________________________________
http://xs141.xs.to/xs141/09303/av992393.jpg
Sceeentiffic zeeureees ere-a joodged by zee cuherence-a zeey lend tu oooor netoorel ixpereeence-a und zee seemplicity veet vheech zeey du su.

>>450
I suggest you look up the definition of "compiler".

>>452 a "native code compiler suite" like GCC or GHC.
With such broad "definition" we should include compilers which compile to JavaScript(there are surprisingly about~20 such compilers, each using a different source language)

_________________________________________________
http://xs135.xs.to/xs135/09042/av922.jpg
Stop trying to rationalize everything, will ya? Let's face it, we have a mystery on our hands!

>>452 a "neteefe-a cude-a cumpeeler sooeete-a" leeke-a GCC oor GHC. Bork Bork Bork!
Veet sooch brued "deffeenishun" ve-a shuoold incloode-a cumpeelers vheech cumpeele-a tu JefeScreept(zeere-a ere-a soorpreesingly ebuoot~20 sooch cumpeelers, iech useeng a deefffferent suoorce-a lungooege-a)

_________________________________________________
http://xs141.xs.to/xs141/09303/av992393.jpg
Stup tryeeng tu reshuneleeze-a iferytheeng, veell ya? Bork Bork Bork! Let's fece-a it, ve-a hefe-a a mystery oon oooor hunds!

You guys get what you deserve. I have never once been tempted to turn off my whitewasher.

>>452
Look, if you want to make up your own definitions for "runtime" and "compiler", you might as well stop with your random signature bullshit and replace that with your custom definitions so we can avoid this kind of confusions.
Otherwise shut up and follow conventions.

It compiles to C. ...and C compiles to native code.

I don't think you'll get what you want unless you go bare metal, it's not about languages, but about language implementations.
Going bare-metal, you will lose support for 3D graphics, unless you plan on writing drivers for the variety of 3D cards that exist these days.

>>285
Yes, I have a correction: put it back the way I had it. You're clueless and shouldn't dare to correct your betters. The languages I listed get 10s because they have simple, regular syntax. Smalltalk is not quite as simple, so it gets a 9.

>>456 As temporary measure, i'll follow your suggestion.
>>457 If it compiles files to C and not including its C compiler which subsequently compiles them to native code,
 it disqualified.

__________________________________________
http://xs135.xs.to/xs135/09042/av922.jpg
Compiler: A program which produces executables.
Runtime:A program loads another program as top execution layer
Virtual machine:A program which executes bytecode or script files
He often argued that human intelligence was more trouble than it was worth. It was more destructive than creative, more confusing than revealing, more discouraging than satisfying, more spiteful than charitable.

>>456 Es tempurery meesoore-a, i'll fulloo yuoor sooggesshun. Bork Bork Bork!
>>457 Iff it cumpeeles feeles tu C und nut incloodeeng its C cumpeeler vheech soobseqooently cumpeeles zeem tu neteefe-a cude-a,
 it deesqooeliffied. Bork Bork Bork!

__________________________________________
http://xs141.xs.to/xs141/09303/av992393.jpg
Cumpeeler: A prugrem vheech prudooces ixecootebles. Bork Bork Bork!
Roonteeme-a:A prugrem lueds unuzeer prugrem es tup ixecooshun leyer
Furtooel mecheene-a:A prugrem vheech ixecootes bytecude-a oor screept feeles
He-a oofftee ergooed thet hoomun intelleegence-a ves mure-a truooble-a thun it ves vurt. Bork Bork Bork! It ves mure-a destroocteefe-a thun creeteefe-a, mure-a cunffooseeng thun refeeleeng, mure-a deescuooreging thun seteesffying, mure-a speeteffool thun chereeteble-a.

Compiler: A program which produces executables.
A compiler is just a tool which translates code from one form to another ( language A -> language B, a language could be anything, a high level language, a low level language like assembler or machine code ). A compiler could call other compilers. Do you know that must things you consider compilers, including msvc or gcc, generate assembly code which is then assembled, and linked. The linking process is separate. The compiler generates native code in that case, but it doesn't generate executables. A linker links together object files and libraries to get an executable.

Runtime:A program loads another program as top execution layer
A library is not a runtime by this definition. Most modern operating systems map the executable image in memory and then map the libraries it is linked against in memory ( usually quite a few ). Runtimes can be understood as those libraries.
Not even .NET can be considered a runtime by your definition, as the it's implemented through loadable libraries, and .net executables are also valid PE executables, even if most of them don't do anything except load the .NET runtime to execute themselves.

Virtual machine:A program which executes bytecode or script files
You didn't specify the execution method. If it compiles the script file to native code, it can't be a Virtual Machine.
There's also environments which interpret script files, and are much slower, they are not Virtual Machines either.

>>461 Fixed>>



________________________________________________
http://xs135.xs.to/xs135/09042/av922.jpg
Compiler: A program which produces executables.
Runtime:A program which loads another program as top execution layer
Virtual machine:A program which executes bytecode
Interpreter:A Virtual Machine which runs scripts
JIT:A program which runs scripts and temporary compiles them into memory
Laws: We know what they are, and what they are worth! They are spider webs for the rich and mighty, steel chains for the poor and weak, fishing nets in the hands of government.

>>461 Feexed>>



________________________________________________
http://xs141.xs.to/xs141/09303/av992393.jpg
Cumpeeler: A prugrem vheech prudooces ixecootebles. Bork Bork Bork!
Roonteeme-a:A prugrem vheech lueds unuzeer prugrem es tup ixecooshun leyer
Furtooel mecheene-a:A prugrem vheech ixecootes bytecude-a
Interpreter:A Furtooel Mecheene-a vheech roons screepts
JIT:A prugrem vheech roons screepts und tempurery cumpeeles zeem intu memury
Levs: Ve-a knoo vhet zeey ere-a, und vhet zeey ere-a vurt! Bork Bork Bork! Zeey ere-a speeder vebs fur zee reech und meeghty, steel cheeens fur zee puur und veek, feeshing nets in zee hunds ooff gufernment.

>>461
except load the .NET runtime to execute themselves.
Thats the point of my definition.


_____________________________________________
http://xs135.xs.to/xs135/09042/av922.jpg
Compiler: A program which produces executables.
Runtime:A program which loads another program as top execution layer
Virtual machine:A program which executes bytecode
Interpreter:A Virtual Machine which runs scripts
JIT:A program which runs scripts and temporary compiles them into memory
The trouble with the rat race is that even if you win, you're still a rat.

>>461
ixcept lued zee .NET roonteeme-a tu ixecoote-a zeemselfes.
Thets zee pueent ooff my deffeenishun. Bork Bork Bork!


_____________________________________________
http://xs141.xs.to/xs141/09303/av992393.jpg
Cumpeeler: A prugrem vheech prudooces ixecootebles. Bork Bork Bork!
Roonteeme-a:A prugrem vheech lueds unuzeer prugrem es tup ixecooshun leyer
Furtooel mecheene-a:A prugrem vheech ixecootes bytecude-a
Interpreter:A Furtooel Mecheene-a vheech roons screepts
JIT:A prugrem vheech roons screepts und tempurery cumpeeles zeem intu memury
Zee truooble-a veet zee ret rece-a is thet ifee iff yuoo veen, yuoo're-a steell a ret.

>>464
But the .NET runtime is just a bunch of libraries, the core of which contains a virtual machine. You're conflating the concepts of libraries, virtual machines and runtimes.

Runtime:A program which loads another program as top execution layer
They all run within the same process.

Technically executable are produced by a linker(which is part of compiler) and runtime could call another runtime(a JVM could interface .Net) but these don't change the basic principles.



__________________________________________
http://xs135.xs.to/xs135/09042/av922.jpg
Compiler: A program which produces executables.
Runtime:A program which loads another program as top execution layer
Virtual machine:A program which executes bytecode
Interpreter:A Virtual Machine which runs scripts
JIT:A program which runs scripts and temporary compiles them into memory
Why do you insist that the human genetic code is "sacred" or "taboo"? It is a chemical process and nothing more. For that matter -we- are chemical processes and nothing more. If you deny yourself a useful tool simply because it reminds you uncomfortably of your mortality, you have uselessly and pointlessly crippled yourself.

Techneecelly ixecooteble-a ere-a prudooced by a leenker(vheech is pert ooff cumpeeler) und roonteeme-a cuoold cell unuzeer roonteeme-a(a JFM cuoold interffece-a .Net) boot zeese-a dun't chunge-a zee beseec preenciples. Bork Bork Bork!



__________________________________________
http://xs141.xs.to/xs141/09303/av992393.jpg
Cumpeeler: A prugrem vheech prudooces ixecootebles. Bork Bork Bork!
Roonteeme-a:A prugrem vheech lueds unuzeer prugrem es tup ixecooshun leyer
Furtooel mecheene-a:A prugrem vheech ixecootes bytecude-a
Interpreter:A Furtooel Mecheene-a vheech roons screepts
JIT:A prugrem vheech roons screepts und tempurery cumpeeles zeem intu memury
Vhy du yuoo inseest thet zee hoomun geneteec cude-a is "secred" oor "tebuu"? Bork Bork Bork! It is a chemeecel prucess und nutheeng mure-a. Bork Bork Bork! Fur thet metter -ve-a- ere-a chemeecel prucesses und nutheeng mure-a. Bork Bork Bork! Iff yuoo deny yuoorselff a useffool tuul seemply becoose-a it remeends yuoo uncumffurtebly ooff yuoor murteleety, yuoo hefe-a uselessly und pueentlessly creeppled yuoorselff.

>>467
People can, and do use a linkers standalone. You could compile an assembly written to an object file, a C written file to another object file and link them together to make an executable.

>>466 Not quite. This proceeds either as
1.vm.exe loads prog.bin
2.vm.exe is bundled with prog.bin in same file and configured to execute prog.bin on startup
3.prog.exe is stub which loads vm.exe, then runs it with vm.exe -decode_and_exec prog.exe
Neihter of the above are true executables.

___________________________________
http://xs135.xs.to/xs135/09042/av922.jpg
Compiler: A program which produces executables.
Runtime:A program which loads another program as top execution layer
Virtual machine:A program which executes bytecode
Interpreter:A Virtual Machine which runs scripts
JIT:A program which runs scripts and temporary compiles them into memory
You're supposed to be developing verbal abilities for your big aptitude test tomorrow.

>>466 Nut qooeete-a. Bork Bork Bork! Thees pruceeds ieezeer es
1.fm.ixe-a lueds prug.been
2.fm.ixe-a is boondled veet prug.been in seme-a feele-a und cunffeegoored tu ixecoote-a prug.been oon stertoop
3.prug.ixe-a is stoob vheech lueds fm.ixe-a, zeen roons it veet fm.ixe-a -decude-a_und_ixec prug.ixe-a
Neeehter ooff zee ebufe-a ere-a trooe-a ixecootebles. Bork Bork Bork!

___________________________________
http://xs141.xs.to/xs141/09303/av992393.jpg
Cumpeeler: A prugrem vheech prudooces ixecootebles. Bork Bork Bork!
Roonteeme-a:A prugrem vheech lueds unuzeer prugrem es tup ixecooshun leyer
Furtooel mecheene-a:A prugrem vheech ixecootes bytecude-a
Interpreter:A Furtooel Mecheene-a vheech roons screepts
JIT:A prugrem vheech roons screepts und tempurery cumpeeles zeem intu memury
Yuoo're-a sooppused tu be-a defelupeeng ferbel ebeelities fur yuoor beeg epteetoode-a test tumurroo.

>>467
If the linker is the one that produces the executable then your definition is wrong by your own standards.

Your definition of runtime suggests that a program that links to DirectX is a runtime, and not the other way around.

Your definition of virtual machine doesn't include virtual machines that run machine code.

Your definition of JIT compiler excludes JIT compilers that generate machine code without generating a proper executable.

>>470
A virtual machine is indeed something which executes bytecode in one form or another, it can interpret it, or it can compile it and run it.
SBCL is not a virtual machine, for the code is already compiled to native code, there is no bytecode there.
You could say that it contains a library within itself, but that's no different than programs which come statically linked with libc.
It doesn't fit your definition of runtime.

>>472
If the linker is the one that produces the executable then your definition is wrong by your own standards.
^Linker is final part of compilation; the compiler is either producing .exe files at the end or not producing them.
there is no third option. 
Your definition of runtime suggests that a program that links to DirectX is a runtime, and not the other way around.
DirectX is runtime integrated into OS, it interface at driver level. Does not compare with JVM. 
Your definition of virtual machine doesn't include virtual machines that run machine code.
These are called Emulators.
Your definition of JIT compiler excludes JIT compilers that generate machine code without generating a proper executable.
Its in the definition. I don't see how you can interpret it otherwise:
A program which runs scripts and temporary compiles them into memory


_____________________________________
http://xs135.xs.to/xs135/09042/av922.jpg
Compiler: A program which produces executables.
Runtime:A program which loads another program as top execution layer
Virtual machine:A program which executes bytecode
Interpreter:A Virtual Machine which runs scripts
JIT:A program which runs scripts and temporary compiles them into memory
Oh, it's night-time. I was having... a daymare.

>>472
Iff zee leenker is zee oone-a thet prudooces zee ixecooteble-a zeen yuoor deffeenishun is vrung by yuoor oovn stunderds.
^Leenker is feenel pert ooff cumpeeleshun; zee cumpeeler is ieezeer prudooceeng .ixe-a feeles et zee ind oor nut prudooceeng zeem. Bork Bork Bork!
zeere-a is nu thurd oopshun. 
Yuoor deffeenishun ooff roonteeme-a sooggests thet a prugrem thet leenks tu DurectX is a roonteeme-a, und nut zee oozeer vey eruoond.
DurectX is roonteeme-a integreted intu OoS, it interffece-a et dreefer lefel. Bork Bork Bork! Dues nut cumpere-a veet JFM. 
Yuoor deffeenishun ooff furtooel mecheene-a duesn't incloode-a furtooel mecheenes thet roon mecheene-a cude-a.
Zeese-a ere-a celled Imooleturs. Bork Bork Bork!
Yuoor deffeenishun ooff JIT cumpeeler ixcloodes JIT cumpeelers thet generete-a mecheene-a cude-a veethuoot genereteeng a pruper ixecooteble-a. Bork Bork Bork!
Its in zee deffeenishun. Bork Bork Bork! I dun't see-a hoo yuoo cun interpret it oozeerveese-a:
A prugrem vheech roons screepts und tempurery cumpeeles zeem intu memury


_____________________________________
http://xs141.xs.to/xs141/09303/av992393.jpg
Cumpeeler: A prugrem vheech prudooces ixecootebles. Bork Bork Bork!
Roonteeme-a:A prugrem vheech lueds unuzeer prugrem es tup ixecooshun leyer
Furtooel mecheene-a:A prugrem vheech ixecootes bytecude-a
Interpreter:A Furtooel Mecheene-a vheech roons screepts
JIT:A prugrem vheech roons screepts und tempurery cumpeeles zeem intu memury
Ooh, it's neeght-teeme-a. Bork Bork Bork! I ves hefeeng... Bork Bork Bork! a deymere-a.

:executable
If true, arrange to combine the sbcl runtime and the core image to create a standalone executable. If false (the default), the core image will not be executable on its own. Executable images always behave as if they were passed the –noinform runtime option.

Hah, I should have read the documentation more carefully. There's no need to create this feature, it already existed.

>>473 Whatever category SBCL.exe belongs to its definitely not a compiler.
By running SBCL.exe i get into interpreter.
Its rightfully will be excluded until the day it features compilation of Lisp programs into real .exe files.



___________________________________
http://xs135.xs.to/xs135/09042/av922.jpg
Compiler: A program which produces executables.
Runtime:A program which loads another program as top execution layer
Virtual machine:A program which executes bytecode
Interpreter:A Virtual Machine which runs scripts
JIT:A program which runs scripts and temporary compiles them into memory
When everyone thinks the same, nobody is thinking.

>>473 Vhetefer cetegury SBCL.ixe-a belungs tu its deffeenitely nut a cumpeeler. Bork Bork Bork!
By roonneeng SBCL.ixe-a i get intu interpreter. Bork Bork Bork!
Its reeghtffoolly veell be-a ixclooded unteel zee dey it feetoores cumpeeleshun ooff Leesp prugrems intu reel .ixe-a feeles. Bork Bork Bork!



___________________________________
http://xs141.xs.to/xs141/09303/av992393.jpg
Cumpeeler: A prugrem vheech prudooces ixecootebles. Bork Bork Bork!
Roonteeme-a:A prugrem vheech lueds unuzeer prugrem es tup ixecooshun leyer
Furtooel mecheene-a:A prugrem vheech ixecootes bytecude-a
Interpreter:A Furtooel Mecheene-a vheech roons screepts
JIT:A prugrem vheech roons screepts und tempurery cumpeeles zeem intu memury
Vhee iferyune-a theenks zee seme-a, nubudy is theenking.

>>474
>These are called Emulators.
No, they're not. An emulator is a virtual machine that replicates or attempts to replicate the behavior or real hardware. A virtual machine, such as the JVM, doesn't replicate any real hardware.

>Its in the definition. I don't see how you can interpret it otherwise:
>A program which runs scripts and temporary compiles them into memory
Right. If your definition of "compiler" is "a program that generates executables", then "to compile" must be "to generate executables". Therefore, a JIT compiler , by your definition, "generates in-memory executables", as opposed to a mere compiler, which writes them to a medium.

>>476 This is Virtual Machine, type 2, read >>470



_____________________________________________
http://xs135.xs.to/xs135/09042/av922.jpg
Compiler: A program which produces executables.
Runtime:A program which loads another program as top execution layer
Virtual machine:A program which executes bytecode
Interpreter:A Virtual Machine which runs scripts
JIT:A program which runs scripts and temporary compiles them into memory
Stranded in this mill town railroad yard while the whole world was converging elsewhere, we seemed to be nothing but children playing among heroic men.