Jump to content




CraftOS 2.0 - Dan's Secret Project

computer help

798 replies to this topic

#21 Slackratchet

  • Members
  • 10 posts

Posted 06 May 2015 - 03:41 PM

Now I want Dwarf Fortress running on a monitor in my base. :)

#22 SquidDev

    Frickin' laser beams

  • Members
  • 1,421 posts
  • LocationDoes anyone put something serious here?

Posted 06 May 2015 - 04:09 PM

I'm thinking this is a Computer Craft related thing again. Maybe another spoiler?

#23 Bomb Bloke

    Hobbyist Coder

  • Moderators
  • 7,099 posts
  • LocationTasmania (AU)

Posted 06 May 2015 - 05:13 PM

Really that sequence of tweets makes me lean further towards "not ComputerCraft".

"Hey, why's ComputerCraft popular?"

"What if I took out the turtles?"

"Um, rather, what if I took out everything that lets you interact with your MineCraft world?" (In response to people reminding him that ComputerCraft can automate via eg redstone and peripherals as well)

So number four, "What could I add to ComputerCraft to make it fun to use?", comes off as having the unspoken implication "... when you're using it outside of MineCraft?".

Dan probably won't read this here, but what the heck, I'm not making a twitter account just to say it (someone can link this post from there if they're feeling generous) - one thing I'd really like to play with again is VDU 23, for defining your own characters. Had all sorts of fun with that as a kid.

Whatever's planned seems to be built with the idea that you can easily use most existing ComputerCraft code with it (so long as that code doesn't rely on a MineCraft world, anyway - but let's assume stuff that Lua doesn't usually have, like the paintutils API, is still available). Dynamic character definitions would mean that if I wanted to, for eg, port across my tetris game, I could use the same "graphics built out of text characters" system I'm using now, and if the character set on offer happens to be missing a suitable block-symbol, I can add one in myself.

Likewise, something like eg Gold Runner could be much more readily customised to use "proper graphics" if the character set were malleable. Furthermore, if scripts don't need to be re-written to use "regular" drawing functions in order to "draw new stuff", it'd be relatively easy to write a single copy of a script that runs in what I'm assuming will be a new environment, as well as in ComputerCraft - backwards compatibility!

#24 dan200

  • Administrators
  • 542 posts
  • LocationCambridge, England

Posted 07 May 2015 - 04:02 PM

I'm really enjoying the speculation in this thread :)

#25 Creator

    Mad Dash Victor

  • Members
  • 2,168 posts
  • LocationYou will never find me, muhahahahahaha

Posted 07 May 2015 - 04:22 PM

View Postdan200, on 07 May 2015 - 04:02 PM, said:

I'm really enjoying the speculation in this thread :)

I think you are feeling like a superior force manipulating us and having fun... ;)

#26 Bomb Bloke

    Hobbyist Coder

  • Moderators
  • 7,099 posts
  • LocationTasmania (AU)

Posted 07 May 2015 - 10:48 PM

Heh, well he clearly doesn't want to give the secret away! :lol:

#27 Antelux

  • Members
  • 295 posts
  • LocationSomewhere in the middle of nowhere.

Posted 07 May 2015 - 11:06 PM

I think we might be looking at some kind of ComputerCraft 2.0 thing after all.
Can't wait to see what this is. It'll be a huge boost of graphics for games like my own, assuming we can use it do so. OS's will probably look way better, too.

EDIT: Made it sound like it was completely unrelated to ComputerCraft. Changed.

Edited by Detective_Smith, 10 May 2015 - 12:09 PM.


#28 MKlegoman357

  • Members
  • 1,170 posts
  • LocationKaunas, Lithuania

Posted 10 May 2015 - 11:56 AM

Another interesting screenshot

The auto-completion and color scheme really reminds ComputerCraft. Could this actually be ComputerCraft 2.0?

EDIT: notice the font - it's not the default MineCraft font.

Edited by MKlegoman357, 10 May 2015 - 12:02 PM.


#29 CrazedProgrammer

  • Members
  • 495 posts
  • LocationWageningen, The Netherlands

Posted 10 May 2015 - 12:05 PM

View PostMKlegoman357, on 10 May 2015 - 11:56 AM, said:

Another interesting screenshot

The auto-completion and color scheme really reminds ComputerCraft. Could this actually be ComputerCraft 2.0?

EDIT: notice the font - it's not the default MineCraft font.
It could be CC 2.0 because of the autocompletion and commands :D

#30 Geforce Fan

  • Members
  • 846 posts
  • LocationMissouri, United States, America, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way, Universe 42B, Life Street, Multiverse, 4th Dimension

Posted 11 May 2015 - 01:03 AM

I'd be excited and afraid for CC 2.0
I hope there'd be some sort of way to port CC 1.0 programs to it.
edit: Related?

Edited by Geforce Fan, 11 May 2015 - 01:07 AM.


#31 Bomb Bloke

    Hobbyist Coder

  • Moderators
  • 7,099 posts
  • LocationTasmania (AU)

Posted 11 May 2015 - 01:11 AM

View PostGeforce Fan, on 11 May 2015 - 01:03 AM, said:

I hope there'd be some sort of way to port CC 1.0 programs to it.

I'd imagine that many scripts (well, other than ones which use peripherals/redstone/turtles/etc) will work as-is.

#32 nitrogenfingers

    Lua Professor

  • Members
  • 551 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 13 May 2015 - 06:54 AM

View PostMKlegoman357, on 10 May 2015 - 11:56 AM, said:


Oh now that is interesting...

Allow me to further, totally baselessly speculate. I'd proffer one of CC's greater achievements is providing such an accessible environment for budding programmers, perhaps this is in the direction of a standalone tool with that sort of 'easy to experiment' mentality in mind? A lot (far from a majority but a lot) of stuff posted here doesn't explicitly need minecraft to work, or even be useful or interesting in whatever context there is after all. Perhaps this is inspired or even somehow linked with the work being done on CCEdu.

#33 MKlegoman357

  • Members
  • 1,170 posts
  • LocationKaunas, Lithuania

Posted 15 May 2015 - 04:43 PM

Yet another screenshot.

Looks like the color pallet is wider than CC's (at least more shades of grey), maybe 32 colors.

#34 Cranium

    Ninja Scripter

  • Moderators
  • 4,031 posts
  • LocationLincoln, Nebraska

Posted 15 May 2015 - 04:50 PM

That kinda confirms that this probably isn't for ComputerCraft as we know it. Likely something completely separate.

#35 MKlegoman357

  • Members
  • 1,170 posts
  • LocationKaunas, Lithuania

Posted 15 May 2015 - 05:00 PM

That's why I'm sticking with this now:

View PostMKlegoman357, on 04 May 2015 - 06:36 AM, said:

Maybe Dan is creating a standalone CC-based game?


#36 Bomb Bloke

    Hobbyist Coder

  • Moderators
  • 7,099 posts
  • LocationTasmania (AU)

Posted 15 May 2015 - 10:32 PM

Dan had been toying with the idea of adding more colours to CC, shortly before starting his "secret project":

http://www.computerc...e-them-in-game/

That said, by this point I've long since been convinced it's not "CC for MineCraft".

#37 MKlegoman357

  • Members
  • 1,170 posts
  • LocationKaunas, Lithuania

Posted 16 May 2015 - 03:38 PM

A tile map editor?

So now it looks like it's a CC-based game in which, just like in ComputerCraft, you can create any program you want, but is mainly meant for very easily creating games.

#38 ebernerd

  • Members
  • 262 posts
  • LocationBoston, MA

Posted 16 May 2015 - 05:38 PM

I seriously think that with the very similar syntax of the ComputerCraft (i.e "edit namehere"), we might get some sort of ComputerCraft thing. It might not be in game, however, it might be some sort of external "emulator" or something that can be it's own "game".

Whatever it is... I WANT IT NOW. xD

#39 Bomb Bloke

    Hobbyist Coder

  • Moderators
  • 7,099 posts
  • LocationTasmania (AU)

Posted 17 May 2015 - 12:52 AM

I would guess that the "edit" script looks at the filename extension to figure out that you want to deal with sprites instead of text? Dunno.

The pipes put me in mind of Mario.

#40 ebernerd

  • Members
  • 262 posts
  • LocationBoston, MA

Posted 17 May 2015 - 01:29 AM

Maybe... just maybe....

Maybe the edit function detects the file extension and you can configure what program opens which extension by default. That would be cool, and actually pretty easy to do.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users