319 replies to this topic

[AfterLifeLochie]

spyman68, on 01 April 2013 - 05:05 AM, said:

Give me a reason why I should use this instead of CCEmu and I might download it, what I see from the online version is, it's an exact copy of CCEmu, but takes longer to load. That's pretty much the only difference I see.

As MysticT said so perfectly, you probably shouldn't yet. There is still a lot of work to be done, a long list of issues to be fixed completely, and who knows what else - aside the features to add.

Peripherals are, in fact, partially supported, and I'm spending today doing optimization of core emulation code. Hopefully I can stamp out some of these weird issues I've been having regarding load speed and performance - which stem from LWJGL. I had hoped using 2.9.0 LWJGL would fix most issues, and it has - as the emulator does now run - albeit buggily - on Mac, but it's introduced some performance issues I do need to address.

Other than that, you can expect Monitors and Disk Drives next - assuming everything continues to run to plan.

Dlcruz129, on 01 April 2013 - 03:31 AM, said:

Quote

You love my HTML posts. No cats were stuffed down tubes to make this markup.

Er... What?

"Cats down tubes" is an old joke. Do not concenrn yourself too much.

[oeed]

I'm interested to know what interface (graphical that is) you are using to load and unload the discs for the drive, will it essentially be the ComputerCraft one?

[AfterLifeLochie]

oeed, on 01 April 2013 - 12:36 PM, said:

I'm interested to know what interface (graphical that it) you are using to load and unload the discs for the drive, will it essentially be the ComputerCraft one?

I'm not sure yet on the specifics - designing how they'll function is next on my to-do list.

[theoriginalbit]

So Lochie. Do you think that its really fair that you are able to do a post that we are not? all that html goodness all because you are a mod and we are stuck with horrible looking text...

[Tiin57]

theoriginalbit, on 01 April 2013 - 02:44 PM, said:

So Lochie. Do you think that its really fair that you are able to do a post that we are not? all that html goodness all because you are a mod and we are stuck with horrible looking text...

It's totally not fair and he knows it. Possibly enjoys it as well.

[Cranium]

Don't complain about the html post. Just bask in it's splendor.

[oeed]

You could just request a moderator to set the html of your post, if they are willing that it. (I presume they can do that)

I'm not familiar at all with IP.Board but maybe if you have a certain number of posts or up votes you can post HTML topics.

[theoriginalbit]

Cranium, on 01 April 2013 - 02:52 PM, said:

Don't complain about the html post. Just bask in it's splendor.

But I want to do my own

oeed, on 01 April 2013 - 02:55 PM, said:

I'm not familiar at all with IP.Board but maybe if you have a certain number of posts or up votes you can post HTML topics.

I'm pretty sure if it was based on post count, if anyone could do it, it would be me... I have over 3000 and am sitting on the top of the "top posters" except for casper who cheated his 100,000...

[AfterLifeLochie]

So back on topic, I'm about to release PR 3.2, which hopefully addresses issues regarding system performance only - eg, the "fps" and other CPU munching issues. Please let me know if this does improve performance so I can continue bug fixing.

Thanks to all of you for all your support - the API and working Monitor peripherals are next on the to-do list!

[theoriginalbit]

AfterLifeLochie, on 01 April 2013 - 05:25 PM, said:

the API and working Monitor peripherals are next on the to-do list!

wasn't closable computers on the list for PR3?

[AfterLifeLochie]

theoriginalbit, on 01 April 2013 - 05:33 PM, said:

AfterLifeLochie, on 01 April 2013 - 05:25 PM, said:

the API and working Monitor peripherals are next on the to-do list!

wasn't closable computers on the list for PR3?

Those have actually been added but aren't included in PR 3.1 or PR 3.2, which were bug and resource fixing mostly. This means I'll probably end up going PR 3.3 and who knows from there.

[Dlcruz129]

AfterLifeLochie, on 01 April 2013 - 12:06 PM, said:

Dlcruz129, on 01 April 2013 - 03:31 AM, said:

Quote

You love my HTML posts. No cats were stuffed down tubes to make this markup.

Er... What?

"Cats down tubes" is an old joke. Do not concenrn yourself too much. />/>

Oh good. As a matter of fact, when I opened the thread, I was thinking, "I swear to god, if any cats were stuffed down a tube during the making of this program, I will go on a rampage."

Thanks for saving me from being banned. />

[Dlcruz129]

theoriginalbit, on 01 April 2013 - 03:04 PM, said:

Cranium, on 01 April 2013 - 02:52 PM, said:

Don't complain about the html post. Just bask in it's splendor.

But I want to do my own /> />

oeed, on 01 April 2013 - 02:55 PM, said:

I'm not familiar at all with IP.Board but maybe if you have a certain number of posts or up votes you can post HTML topics.

I'm pretty sure if it was based on post count, if anyone could do it, it would be me... I have over 3000 and am sitting on the top of the "top posters" except for casper who cheated his 100,000...

It's a mod thing. If I was good at HTML I would be jealous. (Note: I do know HTML, but I have no artistic skill, for anything, period.)

[theoriginalbit]

Dlcruz129, on 01 April 2013 - 05:54 PM, said:

If I was good at HTML I would be jealous.

And I am jealous.

[amtra5]

Could you pleaseeeeeeeeeeee port to iOS? I really want to use this on my iPad

[theoriginalbit]

amtra5, on 01 April 2013 - 07:16 PM, said:

Could you pleaseeeeeeeeeeee port to iOS? I really want to use this on my iPad

You do not know how much work is required to go and 'port' a Java application to any mobile device, let alone an iOS device... its not as simple as pressing a button and bang its ported, it essentially requires an entire remake of program and all its apis from the bottom up... it is a little easier for an Android device, however even that is harder than you would expect... imho iOS is the hardest of the lot to port... there are lots of other design choices that need to be made and its not just a simple 'port'...

[oeed]

Yea, it is almost impossible to port. You would literally have to completely rewrite it.

[AfterLifeLochie]

amtra5, on 01 April 2013 - 07:16 PM, said:

Could you pleaseeeeeeeeeeee port to iOS? I really want to use this on my iPad

It's not going to be possible to port to iOS because I don't want to relearn Objective-C, and code ComputerCraft and the Emulator again from scratch in that language. Java applications can't be ported to iOS because iOS doesn't run Java. Android, does however - and so they'll get a port eventually.

Spoiler

Also, spoiler for next release.

[theoriginalbit]

AfterLifeLochie, on 01 April 2013 - 11:02 PM, said:

It's not going to be possible to port to iOS because I don't want to relearn Objective-C, and code ComputerCraft and the Emulator again from scratch in that language.

Should talk to someone that knows Obj-C *wink* *wink* />

[AfterLifeLochie]

theoriginalbit, on 01 April 2013 - 11:38 PM, said:

AfterLifeLochie, on 01 April 2013 - 11:02 PM, said:

It's not going to be possible to port to iOS because I don't want to relearn Objective-C, and code ComputerCraft and the Emulator again from scratch in that language.

Should talk to someone that knows Obj-C *wink* *wink*

I know Objective C - but the fact of the matter is, you're practically shooting yourself in the foot by having to rewrite CC and the Emulator, an incredibly daunting and ridiculously insane task. While being possible, it's well and truly something that only someone with way too much spare time would be able to do, because you're rewriting just about everything in a chaotic flurry. Pass, thanks.