C++ Emulator NES

Is this impressive?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y71lli8MS8s

It's very nice.

Stop crossposting things from /r/programming (to which you should ``return''!) to /prog/.

>>3
is nice... I'm sharing...

Another software written by religious nutcase.

>>5
>Or so I believe.

Hijacking this thread because this shite site is broke as fuck

What the flying fuck is wrong with my C++ string compare?


//Stem word
string stemWord(string word)
{
    const int word_len = word.length();
    string stems[4] = {"ing","ed","er","s"};
    string temp = "";
    bool isStem;

    if (word_len > 4)
    {
        for (int i = 0; i < 4 || isStem == false; i++)
        {
            if (word.compare(word_len - stems[i].length(), stems[i].length(), stems[i]) == 0)
            {
                for (int x = 0; x < diff; x++)
                {
                    temp[x] += word[x];
                }

                word = temp;
            }       
        }
    }

    return word;
}

The word I'm sending to the is "testing," and this method is supposed to remove the stem (eg. "ing") and return the resulting stemmed word.

According to the MSDN's shitty "still, blahblah.." example (http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/string/string/compare/) this should work perfectly fine.

>>7
It's coded wrong.

dat hebrew

Oh god is that FrozenAutist? Because he's also using that u8 hungarian bullshitation.

Seriously, what the hell? why would you clutter your code like that

>>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.

He should try Java or COBOL next time.

>>5
He's like another tdavis, except less autistic.

>>13
BTW, where is tdavis?

>>13
And a jewish nutcase, instead of a christian nutcase

>>15
Also: What I don't understand is why these kind of people are always borderline retarded.

Can't you just be a genius without being a retard?

>>1
why the fuck didn't he use javascript? is there something wrong with it?

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


  t("!  !! ! !!   !! !   !! ! !      !!  !   !  ! ! !/"),
  t("!! ! !!   !! !   !! ! !      !!  !   !  ! ! ! ! /"),
  t("!  !! ! !!   !! !   !! ! !      !!  !   !  ! ! !/"),
  t("!! ! !!   !! !   !! ! !      !!  !   !  ! ! ! ! /"),
  t("!  !! ! !!   !! !   !! ! !      !!  !   !  ! ! !/"),
  t("!! ! !!   !! !   !! ! !      !!  !   !  ! ! ! ! /"),

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.

>>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!

>>17
Javascript is shit. The web browser is a platform for retards.

dubz

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.

>>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?

And these !! ! doesnt look exceedingly maintainable either.
"!  !! ! !!   !! !   !! ! !      !!  !   !  ! ! !/"

>>25
Such software in Lisp would be slower and will consume more memory.
If you like, try writing such an emulator in Lisp.

>>27
Such software in Lisp would be slower and will consume more memory.
because x86 was designed to run C/C++ code, not Lisp.

>>28
There will be clear performance difference: no one would be using the Lisp version. It would be simply too slow and bloated.

>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).

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.

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.

>>30
IF billion of flies eat shit, it must be good.

>>31
Prove it, faggot.

>>33
How would i prove it? By writing a C compiler for an obsolete architecture no one in their right mind would use?

For the record the current Lisp machines are  DEC Alpha RISC, and RISC C compilers are the fastest thing on the road.

>>35
Your answer shows that you're out of viable arguments. I will interpret it as your surrender.

>>34
Your answer shows that you're out of viable arguments. I will interpret it as your surrender.

The argument is Lisp machines in the current form are RISC machines, and C is fastest on both CISC and RISC.
Case closed.

>>38
The argument is that your mother in her current form is a fat whore, and she is fastest on sucking cocks.
Case closed.

>>39
Your answer shows that you're out of viable arguments. I will interpret it as your surrender.