>>10
FrozenZob uses Microsoft Word as an IDE and recommends a non monospaced serif font for coding. He gives a lot of perfectly good faggot reason to do this everytime he floods the front page.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-11 18:14
He should try Java or COBOL next time.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-11 19:14
>>5
He's like another tdavis, except less autistic.
This is fake. I don't really know what "fake" means, exactly, in this context... but what I can tell you is that this isn't a video of a guy who just sits down and cranks out an emulator in 30 minutes (or whatever the supposed timespan is).
For starters, there is a bunch of non-text shit that's just pasted in as strings in the first video -- see the "Ins()" function for an example. There's nothing wrong with using raw byte data to get shit done, but it's shitty to act like "hey, you know, I just typed
because I'm a fucking genius and I have the internal ROM of the NES memorized just for kicks.
Second, as the video progresses, he stops caring about making it look non-fake, and you can see that every single line is typed at exactly the same speed, no typos, no backspacing...
My best guess is that he found some emulator code and used a script or a tool to just dump one character at a time while screen-capping. It may be an editor he wrote, or maybe not, but who cares. He's a cocksucker for pretending that he's a guy who just sits down at his computer and pulls an emulator out of his ass because he's just so fucking hax3r.
>>18
Ah, I see he has a FAQ explaining how the video was made. I'll never actually read it, but I'm sure there's a disclaimer about it not actually being typed in the video.
It's still bullshit because why the fuck would someone post a video of their code being piped into a screen-cap, except to make it look like you are some kind of mega-autist coder?
Ulillillia is vastly superior to this fake cockbag.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-12 3:46
>>18
You're a fucking moron. Those lines of text have nothing to do with a NES ROM, it's a reconstruction of the 6502 CPU circuit as sequences of look-up tables used for multiplexing and demultiplexing. Using strings as a more condensed alternative to byte/integer arrays is perfectly valid. You obviously have zero experience with practical ISA design and digital circuits. Go fuck yourself!
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-12 3:51
>>17
Javascript is shit. The web browser is a platform for retards.
The thing i learnt from that video was that you can be a professional on any OS. He's using DOS, but joe, SDL and opengl, knows his libraries and switches graphics modes on the fly (gotta be a cool TSR)
>>18,19
If he actually wrote code at the speed of the video, he would be typing (and thinking) at around 600WPM.
It's still bullshit because why the fuck would someone post a video of their code being piped into a screen-cap, except to make it look like you are some kind of mega-autist coder?
Exactly.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-12 6:58
>>20 it's a reconstruction of the 6502 CPU circuit as sequences of look-up tables used for multiplexing and demultiplexing.
C/C++ sucks so much, you have to use external DSL and write a parser even for a simple emulator?
Name:
F r o z e n V o i d !!mJCwdV5J0Xy2A212011-12-12 8:04
>>25
Such software in Lisp would be slower and will consume more memory.
If you like, try writing such an emulator in Lisp.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-12 8:06
>>27 Such software in Lisp would be slower and will consume more memory.
because x86 was designed to run C/C++ code, not Lisp.
Name:
F r o z e n V o i d !!mJCwdV5J0Xy2A212011-12-12 8:08
>>28
There will be clear performance difference: no one would be using the Lisp version. It would be simply too slow and bloated.
Name:
F r o z e n V o i d !!mJCwdV5J0Xy2A212011-12-12 8:14
>because x86 was designed to run C/C++ code
because every architecture today was "designed to run C/C++" code it supposedly runs the fastest.
Find any (modern) architecture where you can buy chips which run some non-asm language faster than C
Thats right:you can't, because all of them from the smallest micro-controller to the supercomputing networks prefer to work with C or at least Fortran(for math).
Name:
F r o z e n V o i d !!mJCwdV5J0Xy2A212011-12-12 8:16
Chips "optimized for C" are all architectures. Even your obsolete Lisp machines, if given a proper, non-braindamaged C compiler would produce the fastest code in C.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-12 8:19
Yea he probably took some hours
`
A) No, it's not sped up. But the input is pre-choreographed. The computer
implements the choreography, as well as designs a part of it.
It is a TAS, except I'm not speedrunning; I'm just aiming for
15 minutes and to utilize it in the most entertaining manner.
My typing speed is not the focus of that video; it is not even
being presented except in a small part of the 2/2 video.
The focus is in the source code.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-12 8:19
>>30
IF billion of flies eat shit, it must be good.
>>45
It looks like it's a tool that records input and then plays it back, sped-up, to make someone look like a better/faster coder (or game player) than they are. Which means that my original comment, >>18-19, was EXACTLY correct, ass clown.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-13 13:10
>>21
You are using a webbrowser, ergo, you're a retard
not that it wasn't already obvious
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-13 14:30
http://www.youtube.com/user/Bisqwit Live programming as a form of art. Niche entertainment from hardware I grew with (NES, PC, AdLib). Pro-Israel and pro-Torah message.
>>46
If you honestly have this feeling that whenever you see something that doesn't quite seem right on youtube it must have been made to made the user look better and/or faster (by tricking the viewer) you must have some sort of emotional issues that need to be dealt with. It's not like he even tries to make it look like that; just look at the video description!
Do you think that whenever they make a cut to another camera angle in a movie scene the director is trying to trick the people viewing in thinking they have a teleporting cameraman and that they cheated by not filming the thing in one whole take?
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-14 13:59
>>50
If you honestly have this feeling that whenever you see someone posting a sped-up video of themselves writing code, when the autist could have just [i]posted the fucking code itself, instead[i], that there can possibly be any reason other than some sort of emotional issues that need to be dealt with, then you are just an idiot!
Do you think that whenever someone posts code as a fucking .C file instead of a "tool assisted speedrun" that they're trying to trick the people into actually reading it, instead of forcing their audience to watch one character at a time magically appear on the screen for 30 minutes?
Seriously, you're fucking stupid, and this hero of yours is severely handicapped. If you think he's cool because of his quirkiness, that's fine. But pretending that there is absolutely anything useful about this garbage just makes you a dipshit.
>>51 when the autist could have just [i]posted the fucking code itself, instead[i]
He did post the code, in the description. If that's the way that you prefer to read it, you can just do that. I'm not really sure why you're complaining.
>>53 Is this impressive? No, it's fake and pointless No it isn't, it's awesome > No, it isn't, and you're stupid for thinking that it is > > I'm not sure why you're complaining