Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-4041-

Linux games

Name: Linux games 2011-11-25 10:34

Linux games

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 10:37

You just posted this on /g/. Get out.
>>3
No, you go back to /g/, ``faggot''!

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 10:38

>>2
Back to /g/, ``please''!!

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 11:20

>>1
>>2
>>3
Back to /g/, ``please'' !!

Name: F r o z e n V o i d !!mJCwdV5J0Xy2A21 2011-11-25 11:30

Lunix is filled with games(major desktop distros), last time i checked. Thousands of games, most made by single authors(probably some from /prog/).
The quality is mediocre at best, so most people prefer play games in wine.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 11:33

Touhou runs without problems on Wine/Linux. That's all I need.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 11:45

touhou caca

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 11:57

>>6
The Touhous never work for me in full-screen. So I have to xrandr --size 800x600, then flick my monitor to 4:3.
Did ZUN really think people had 640x480 monitors in the mid-2000s?

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 14:08

Touhou is non-free software and thus considered harmful to your freedom.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 14:33

>>9
The characters are free as in freedom. The games and their data can't be copied freely but music arranges are allowed.
It's no GPL but it's still much closer to the ideals of the FSF than the majority of games.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 14:36

>>9
Touhou isn't software. It's art.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 14:42

>>10
I'm fine with art, music and such being proprietary, but I am strongly against the code not being free. I wouldn't mind buying games like that, where I pay for these game files, but am still able to do anything with the game engine and other software included. A few images and such don't force me to trust unknown binaries without any source available.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 14:43

Touhou isn't art. It's shit.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 14:46

Shit is art.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 14:47

>>12
In Touhou's case it's a necessary evil. We'd have too many low quality fangames if the source was open. In fact we do now, but at least developers have to put some effort into them.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 14:47

>>14
Not all shit is art, but all art is shit.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 14:49

>>15
That hardly matters, low quality forks would be ignored anyway.
``Not free software so that bad clones aren't made'' is a pathetic argument for proprietary code. I'd rather see some /prog/ger make a shitty clone that will die off in a matter of days every now and then than use non-free software.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 14:50

>>12
My personal theory is that ZUN was going to release the game engine as free software but he became frustrated when he saw circles gaining money simply by running untouched MIDI into a synth. That's also why no games after PoFV demo contain MIDI information.
Another likely theory is that he's ashamed of the quality of his code.

Name: F r o z e n V o i d !!mJCwdV5J0Xy2A21 2011-11-25 14:54

If you don't understand art(as common with people who think photography trumps art), it doesn't mean art is shit: you just lack the means to discern the quality of the medium.
I could say "all source code in Lisp is shit", because i don't see anything beyond a sea of parens and cryptic nesting of functions, but to expert Lisp programmer such seas of parens are probably easily understood and he can construct a complex model of a program which would be impossible to discern for casual programmers unfamiliar with such code.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 14:58

>>19
I could say "all FrozenVoid's code is shit", because i don't see anything beyond a sea of obfuscated gibberish and unnecessary #defines, but to the FrozenVoid such sea of shit is probably easily understood and he can construct a complex model of a program which would be impossible to discern for neurotypical programmers unfamiliar with FrozenVoid's obfuscation techniques.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 15:02

>>17
http://erol.dyndns-ip.com/touhoulibre/
I think it's a /prog/rider, and it's supposedly free as in freedom but I can't find sources or an executable.

Name: F r o z e n V o i d !!mJCwdV5J0Xy2A21 2011-11-25 15:07

>>20
>obfuscation techniques.
If i was obfuscating my own code, how would i work with it? #defines simplify my workflow:
i can change just the define to quickly test many use cases and settings, without touching main code.
without #defines i would have to rewrite  code in specific multiple locations, with one define it simplified to changing the #define
and the main code works as expected. Also, why complaining about #define while you're abusing macros in Lisp in ways #define does not even compare?

Name: VIPPER 2011-11-25 15:12

>>20
neurotypical programmers
You best be trolling nigger.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 15:15

Please don't turn this serious thread into some flamewar involving FrostyEmptiness and Asperger's syndrome, cupcakes~!!

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 15:15

>>22
#define void v0
$ echo -E 'main(){printf("%d\n",sizeof(void));}'|gcc -w -xc -;./a.out;rm a.out
1

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 15:52

>>25
That's a GNU extension.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 15:59

>>26
So, is void's actual size 0 then? Because, GCC feature or not, v1 would be more valid than v0. Or simply v.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 16:21

>>27
sizeof(void) is not defined.

6.5.3.4 The sizeof operator
Constraints
The sizeof operator shall not be applied to an expression that has function type or an
incomplete type (...)

And void is an incomplete type which cannot be completed:

6.2.5 Types
The void type comprises an empty set of values; it is an incomplete type that cannot be completed.

(Sorry, I don't know how to properly quote things here.)

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 16:24

>>28
pedantic fagstorm detected

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 16:29

>>28
Can you do pointer arithmetic on a void *?
If yes, then void must have a size.

Anyway, FV #defined void as v0 (in his style of naming types as $type_initial$size, such as u4 for uint32_t). Is it correct saying that sizeof(void)==0 then?

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 16:30

>>29
Not pedantic, anyone can go and read it, and learn from it. Not really exclusive to anyone, nor should it be. (Though doing the right thing seems to really be an exclusive ability of a few.)

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 16:33

>>30
You can't do [const]void*[/const] pointer arithmetic. That should answer your entire post.

Actually, you can't do pointer arithmetic with any incomplete pointer type. You can't perform:


struct s *p1, *p2;
p1 - p2;

without defining struct s.

sizeof(void) is not defined, but some implementations give it a size of zero (which is rather logical) as an extension. I'm not sure whether this is a violation of the standard, but I believe it is not.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 16:34

>>32
Duh, I've written [const] instead of [ code ].

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 16:36

>>32
No, it answers just the first half of the post. Also, you can in GNU C.
Also, I think FV uses MinGW, which means that sizeof his void actually is 1.
Why do you support #define void v0 anyway?

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 16:37

>>31
It's almost completely useless. I always rely on platform-dependent behaviour, such as using 2's complement for integers and bytes being exactly 8 bits wide.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 16:40

>>34
You can't, at least not in pedantic mode. (I've just ran into a compilation error here precisely due to that :). Again, it may work as an extension, which is probably legitimate.

I don't support that definition, who told you that? (I'm not the guy who suggested that.)

Also, I've never seen sizeof(void) happening except due to some obscure macro expansion, neither in pre-standard code.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 16:41

>>35
That's just your opinion. Some others care about portability. Declaring it to be completely useless is what really is pedantic.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 16:51

>>37
I said almost. l2read, fag

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 18:32

>>37
If you cared about portability you wouldn't be writing in C. You'd be writing in a Compile once. Run everywhere. language like Java.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 18:44

>>39
Java is Compile once. Run away.
Common Lisp is Compile once. Run everywhere.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 19:37

>>39

You do have a point, but I've never seen something like that happening with either Java (or Common Lisp).

Oh wait. You have to make the user install the "interpreter", right? That's fair. Like, rather the same to have him install the non-standard/portable library in his system, in the first place.

Now, Common Lisp indeed has a couple of advantages over C. But. Java?

"Portable." Lol

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 22:15

>>41
Oh wait. You have to make the user install the "interpreter", right? That's fair. Like, rather the same to have him install the non-standard/portable library in his system, in the first place.
You mean I have to install a libc and a loader to run C executables?! OMG!!!!!!

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-25 23:46

>>30
Compile once. Run forever.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-26 1:18

There are only two games on Linux:
1. The GNU C Compiler.
2. The Kernel Recompilation.

Name: F r o z e n V o i d !!mJCwdV5J0Xy2A21 2011-11-26 1:27

Entire thread discuss why i #define v0 void???
well actually it just sounds like v0id(void) with the last 2 chars removed(and its simpler to remember)
I don't really care about the sizeof(v0), since its not used for size.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-26 7:56

>>30
Can you do pointer arithmetic on a void *?
That's a GNU extension as well, you should really try compiling with -pedantic and specifying a non-GNU standard if you don't want to be compiler dependent.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-26 7:58

Why #define and not typedef?

Name: F r o z e n V o i d !!mJCwdV5J0Xy2A21 2011-11-26 8:15

>>47
1.These are simple types. If i really needed typedefs(typically for complex types like typedef struct/typedef type array), i'll write them for that case.
2.you can #undef #define in the middle of file to change local types.
3.i prefer to use only one versatile d=#define for  functions, chunks of code and constant
instead of typedefs,inline functions,and #defines (#define replaces them all)
4.#define can be using other defines/vars, since it manipulated text, while typedef is static single-purpose declaration aliasing a type(it cannot combine or change things at compile time).

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-26 8:31

>>48
you can #undef #define in the middle of file to change local types.
What a terrible idea.

Name: F r o z e n V o i d !!mJCwdV5J0Xy2A21 2011-11-26 8:58

>>49
You can undef/redef chunks of code and constants too based on conditional variables(like usefunc=funcA),all in compile-time

Name: F r o z e n V o i d !!mJCwdV5J0Xy2A21 2011-11-26 9:09

In fact redefining alot of code with #ifdef(usually found in many headers)#endif can be avoided if its #define'd as chunk of code which can be redefed like lego blocks.

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-26 9:38

>>51
>treating code like lego
Terminal Autism.

Name: SUPERTUX 2011-11-26 12:15

SUPERTUX

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-26 13:25

Tetris on sed and Quadronix on bash!

Name: Anonymous 2011-11-26 13:49

<--- check 'em dubz
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode -