#exult@irc.freenode.net logs for 14 Jun 2002 (GMT)

Archive Today Yesterday Tomorrow
Exult homepage

[00:58:43] <-- Darke has left IRC (gibson.openprojects.net irc.openprojects.net)
[01:00:53] --> Darke has joined #exult
[01:00:53] --- ChanServ gives channel operator status to Darke
[01:02:45] --- Darke is now known as Darke|afk
[01:29:13] --> Kirben has joined #exult
[01:29:13] --- ChanServ gives channel operator status to Kirben
[01:53:44] <-- Kirben has left IRC (gibson.openprojects.net irc.openprojects.net)
[01:53:44] <-- Darke|afk has left IRC (gibson.openprojects.net irc.openprojects.net)
[01:53:44] <-- matto has left IRC (gibson.openprojects.net irc.openprojects.net)
[01:54:39] --> Kirben has joined #exult
[01:54:39] --> Darke|afk has joined #exult
[01:54:39] --> matto has joined #exult
[05:14:41] <-- matto has left IRC ("This feeling.. inside me. Finally found my life, I'm finally free. No longer torn in two. Living my own life by learning f)
[06:02:57] --- Darke|afk is now known as Darke
[07:30:15] <-- Kirben has left IRC (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
[07:32:26] --> Kirben has joined #exult
[07:32:26] --- ChanServ gives channel operator status to Kirben
[09:15:35] --- Kirben is now known as Rikneb
[09:16:54] * Darke rearranges Rikneb's molecules, to complement his namerearrangement.
[09:17:09] --- Rikneb is now known as Kirben
[09:17:37] <-- Kirben has left IRC ("System Meltdown")
[09:17:48] --> Kirben has joined #exult
[09:35:48] --> Fermi has joined #exult
[09:36:32] <-- Fermi has left IRC (Client Quit)
[11:04:31] --- Darke is now known as Darke|afk
[11:24:41] <-- Kirben has left IRC ("System Meltdown")
[11:24:52] --> Kirben has joined #exult
[11:36:51] --> wjp has joined #exult
[11:36:51] --- ChanServ gives channel operator status to wjp
[11:36:57] <wjp> hi
[12:12:27] <Kirben> hmm when attacking npcs, you can still talk to them like usual. Even worse it seems to reset the NPC, Isn't that a bug ?
[12:13:24] <Kirben> by reset I mean they no longer attack
[12:24:59] <wjp> yeah, that's a bug
[12:25:01] <Kirben> later part doesn't effect guards though.
[12:25:12] <wjp> Jeff doesn't seem to want to fix it though, somehow
[12:26:12] <wjp> there's apparently some NPCs that you do have to talk to while hostile
[12:26:18] <Kirben> summoned creatures jsut seem to stand around too.
[12:26:47] <Kirben> I hope Exult is eventually equal to original comat wise.
[12:27:03] <wjp> yeah, might take a while, though
[12:27:13] <wjp> it's quite tricky to figure out exactly how things work
[12:28:03] <Kirben> armor and weapon details have been decoded now though, right ?
[12:28:47] <wjp> yeah, I think so
[12:28:55] <wjp> not sure if they're actually implemented yet
[12:29:11] <wjp> I hope Jeff's planning a big combat-rebalance sometime soon
[12:29:44] <Kirben> It is another of those to be added after 1.0 if I remember right from forums.
[13:09:32] --> Colourless has joined #Exult
[13:09:32] --- ChanServ gives channel operator status to Colourless
[13:10:20] <wjp> hi
[13:13:37] <Colourless> hi
[13:14:11] <Kirben> Colourless: does the new oog music work in exult 1.1.0cvs for you ?
[13:14:48] <Colourless> i don't know. i'm yet to download the oggs
[13:21:37] <Colourless> wjp: with pentagram can we use .cpp extensions. using .cc with MSVC is a real pain in the ass
[13:22:02] <wjp> .cpp?... ugh
[13:22:44] <Colourless> you have a particular aversion to this?
[13:22:54] <wjp> well, yes :-)
[13:23:03] <wjp> I'm just trying to remember why :-)
[13:24:32] * Colourless waits
[13:24:59] <wjp> I think .cpp isn't recognized by make as C++ source files
[13:25:13] <Colourless> try it
[13:25:14] <Colourless> :-)
[13:25:28] <wjp> the make infopage doesn't list .cpp as a recognized extension
[13:25:39] <Colourless> i know that .cc isn't recognised by msvc as a c++ source file.
[13:27:36] <wjp> ok, make does seem to accept it
[13:27:42] <wjp> strange that it isn't in the info page
[13:29:17] <Colourless> what extensions are recognized?
[13:29:34] <Colourless> according to the infopage
[13:29:43] <wjp> .cc and .C
[13:32:33] <Colourless> .C isn't exactly a portable extension :-)
[13:32:44] <wjp> yeah, I really wouldn't use that one :-)
[13:34:29] <Colourless> perhaps I will send a email to exult general asking if anyone knows a particular reason why .cpp shouldn't be used.
[13:54:09] --> Nadir has joined #exult
[13:54:09] --- ChanServ gives channel operator status to Nadir
[13:54:26] <Nadir> Colourless: have you read my email ?
[13:56:12] <Nadir> I believe .cpp is some kind of Microsoft aberration because all extensions had to be 3 letters long (just like the horrid .htm)
[13:57:10] <Colourless> that doesn't make much sense. extensions could be 0, 1, 2 or 3 characters. they didn't just have to be 3.
[13:57:20] <Nadir> I know that
[13:57:36] <Nadir> but then again Microsoft always has to reinvent wheels
[13:57:46] <Nadir> like using backslash instead of slash
[13:58:01] <Nadir> I believe the original AT&T implementation used .C
[14:00:02] <Nadir> I'm searching through Bjarne Stroustrup's homepage to find info about it
[14:00:48] <Colourless> btw, im asking the question in regards to pentagram, not exult
[14:00:51] <Colourless> :-)
[14:03:12] --> Cless has joined #Exult
[14:03:12] <-- Colourless has left IRC (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
[14:03:19] --- Cless is now known as Colourless
[14:03:25] --- ChanServ gives channel operator status to Colourless
[14:04:05] <Colourless> since no actual files exist for the real pentagram yet, i'm trying to push for the usage of the cpp extension
[14:04:44] <Nadir> you should have said so, then :)
[14:05:21] <wjp> hi Nadir
[14:06:28] <Nadir> g++ has no objection
[14:06:29] <Nadir> hi
[14:07:59] <Nadir> although I really dislike cpp
[14:08:18] <Nadir> not that I have commit rights to the pentagram repo anyway :)
[14:09:07] <Colourless> i could say I equally dislike cc :-)
[14:09:08] <wjp> Nadir: want them?
[14:16:43] <-- Kirben has left IRC ("System Meltdown")
[14:33:37] <-- Nadir has left IRC (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
[19:01:11] * Darke|afk doesn't like cpp either, he likes even less the 'hpp' people seem to throw around too. *grin* Although 'cc' is, IIRC, technically a holdover from when things were called 'C with Classes', so is probably 'correct' through sheer accident of history. *grin*
[19:01:15] --- Darke|afk is now known as Darke
[19:02:28] <Darke> But ultimately it's completely arbitary. 'foo.cc' and 'foo.h' are just easier to type then 'foo.cpp' and 'foo.hpp'. *grin*
[19:02:50] <Colourless> i never said anything about hpp ;-0
[19:03:04] <Colourless> s/;-0/;-)/
[19:05:32] * Colourless thinks pentagram should be designed better than exult, so things like this (found in Map_chunk::set_terrain) don't get done:
[19:05:36] <Colourless> // Kind of nasty, I know:
[19:05:36] <Colourless> if (dynamic_cast<Terrain_game_object *>(each))
[19:05:36] <Colourless> removes.push_back(each);
[19:06:04] * Darke was just noting 'hpp' just in case. *grin*
[19:06:20] * Darke agrees. *grin*
[19:06:40] <Colourless> it's arguable abusing the language :-)
[19:07:20] <Colourless> s/arguable/arguably/
[19:07:47] * Darke calls the RSPCPL.
[19:08:13] <Colourless> hehe
[19:08:38] <Colourless> did you miss out a p there?
[19:09:08] <Darke> s/RSPCPL/Royal Society for Prevention of Crualty to Programming Languages/
[19:09:10] <Colourless> if i'm interpreting it correctly, i would have thought the acronym would have been RSPCPPL
[19:09:18] <Colourless> ah ok :-)
[19:09:51] <Colourless> I was thinking Royal Society for Protection of C Plus plus Language :-)
[19:10:54] <Colourless> i really douby royalty would care much about programming languages :-)
[19:11:01] <Colourless> s/douby/doubt/
[19:11:22] <Darke> I think that 'parses' better into the original 'RSPCA' theme, since it's got a similar number of sylables. But whatever. *grin*
[19:11:30] * Darke doesn't think so too. *grin*
[19:12:28] <Colourless> if they did, obfuscated programming contests would probably be outlawed
[19:12:45] <Darke> Obviously that's a significant problem. We obviously need to brain wash whichever prince is next in line for the throne so he becomes a programmer. *grin*
[19:12:53] * Darke giggles.
[19:13:19] <Colourless> hey will's ;-)
[19:16:36] * Darke wonders if teaching someone to program against their will is considered "Cruel and unusual punishment".
[19:16:51] <Colourless> depends on what language i guess
[19:17:11] <Colourless> i mean BrainF**k or Intercal you will be risking it
[19:18:16] <Colourless> then again to teach someone those, you'd probably need to learn them yourself :-)
[19:20:56] <Darke> Oh certainly, but some people are just not as masochistic. *grin*
[19:28:42] --> artaxerxes has joined #exult
[19:28:45] <artaxerxes> Hi all
[19:28:48] <Darke> Hi.
[19:29:02] <Colourless> hi
[19:29:19] <artaxerxes> can someone help me a bit wtr the translation ? A phrase I don't precisely master the meaning of.
[19:29:33] <Colourless> we'll try
[19:29:34] <wjp> sure
[19:29:36] <wjp> hi
[19:29:41] <artaxerxes> 'Tis sad to see the likes of him and his friends making a mockery of Monitor's ideals
[19:30:01] <artaxerxes> does that mean that the guy ACTUALLY makes fun of M's ideals ?
[19:30:07] <artaxerxes> or just his friends ?
[19:30:17] <wjp> he and his friends
[19:30:22] <Colourless> yeah it means him and his friends
[19:30:31] <artaxerxes> great thx
[19:30:52] <artaxerxes> can someone explain the meaning of "the likes of him" ?
[19:31:09] <wjp> it has a negative sound to it
[19:31:16] <artaxerxes> or should I read the likes of "him and his friends
[19:31:20] <artaxerxes> or should I read the likes of "him and his friends"
[19:31:31] <wjp> it's the likes of "him and his friends"
[19:31:35] <artaxerxes> ahhh
[19:32:11] <artaxerxes> similar to "the actions", "the words" of him and his friends, right ?
[19:32:14] <Colourless> the comment is saying that it's sad to see people like 'him and his friends' making a mockery...
[19:32:27] <wjp> I guess "the likes of them" would mean "people like them" literally
[19:32:35] <artaxerxes> ah ok.
[19:32:36] <wjp> but I think it has a more negative ring to it then the latter
[19:32:43] <artaxerxes> I see
[19:32:47] <artaxerxes> that helps a lot.
[19:32:55] <artaxerxes> sorry for intruding in your conversations ! :)
[19:33:02] <wjp> what conversations?
[19:33:10] * wjp doesn't remember seeing one of those lately ;-)
[19:33:30] * artaxerxes is glad to bring some topics up
[19:33:31] <wjp> Colourless: am I right about the tone of 'the likes of them', btw?
[19:34:10] <artaxerxes> that would give "les gens comme eux"... perfect... just negative a bit...
[19:34:19] <artaxerxes> exactly like in English
[19:34:44] <Colourless> wjp: yeah pretty much.
[19:35:18] <artaxerxes> great... I'll get back to work... 116 to go
[19:35:26] <Colourless> i can only say that it's ever used when talking about something negatively
[19:36:00] * Darke nods. It does have a negative connatation associated with it.
[19:37:42] * artaxerxes thx all for their precious hlep
[19:37:59] <artaxerxes> ciao
[19:38:02] <-- artaxerxes has left IRC ("using sirc version 2.211+KSIRC/1.1")
[19:38:04] <Darke> Bye.
[19:40:27] <Colourless> i've now downloaded 204 mb of the 302 mb wince embeddeded visual tools
[19:40:58] <Darke> Oooh.
[19:41:12] --> artaxerxes has joined #exult
[19:41:26] <Colourless> less than 8 hours to go now :-)
[19:41:30] <artaxerxes> just checked the logs... you _HAD_ a conversation topic goin' on... :)
[19:42:23] <artaxerxes> btw, what's plan for post 1.0 exult ?
[19:43:03] <artaxerxes> s/plan/planned/
[19:43:04] <Colourless> no, the conversation was very much finished :-)
[19:43:17] <Darke> Umm... sure. If you think a dialogue about "The Royal Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Programming Languages" is really a worthwhile conversation. *grin*
[19:44:03] <Darke> I think the post exult v1.0 plans run something like: "Add neat features, but don't break things too much." *grin*
[19:44:30] <artaxerxes> by curiosity, in the Exult code, I saw tons of things I've never seen before (I'm mostly a C programmer): the use of "<" and ">" around a word.. is it some sort of vector or something ?
[19:44:59] <Colourless> it's a template, or a cast
[19:45:11] <artaxerxes> for post 1.0, localisation would be a great _help_ *hint hint*
[19:45:19] <artaxerxes> how does that work ?
[19:47:04] <Darke> It allows you to write generic functions and classes, such as a 'compare' function that doesn't care if you're using a char, or an int, or a long long, or a string. Or a vector that can be created to contain any specific type (such as a vector<int> or vector<string>) without having to write a specific vector to handle each case.
[19:47:07] <Colourless> a template allows you to create a class (or function) that uses an unknown type. When you create the object (or call the function) the compiler automatically works out the unknown type
[19:48:22] <artaxerxes> I thought C++ did cast overloading automatically...
[19:48:49] <Colourless> casting is differint to using templates.
[19:49:25] <Colourless> unlike c which only has a single casting type, C++ has a variety of different casts that have different functionality
[19:50:01] <Colourless> C++ will automatically down cast, but any other cast you will need to do manually
[19:52:08] <artaxerxes> sorry I meant function overloading... like having: int f(int test) and int f(char *s)... and a call to f with an int as param will use the first one and with a string will use the 2nd one
[19:52:32] <artaxerxes> (or is it call param overloading)
[19:52:42] <wjp> that's function overloading, yes
[19:52:48] <wjp> but templates are different
[19:52:50] <Colourless> using a template will allows you to write a single function that will be used both times
[19:53:21] <wjp> template <class T> int f(T t) { cout << t << endl; }
[19:53:47] <wjp> you can now use f<int>(variable); to write an integer
[19:53:54] <wjp> or f<string>(variable); to write a string
[19:54:14] <artaxerxes> you have to put the type after the "f" ?
[19:54:33] <artaxerxes> you have to put the type after the "f" in the example you gave ?
[19:54:50] <wjp> yeah
[19:55:02] <artaxerxes> curious
[19:55:03] <wjp> but templates are probably mostly used for classes
[19:55:08] <Colourless> actually you don't. :-)
[19:55:15] <artaxerxes> is it THAT useful ?
[19:55:16] <wjp> oh, right, it's inferred in this case
[19:55:40] <wjp> well, the standard C++ library contains lots of template storage classes
[19:55:45] <Darke> Very useful. *grin*
[19:55:48] <wjp> for vectors, linked lists, hash tables, maps, etc..
[19:55:49] <artaxerxes> or just a neat prog trick you wanted to learn ? :)
[19:56:10] <Darke> `string` is actually a `basic_string<char>` type.
[19:56:11] <Darke> IIRC.
[19:56:15] <wjp> you can use all of these to store any type of datatype you want
[19:56:23] <wjp> s/datatype/data/
[19:56:34] <wjp> so you can have a list<int> for a list of integers
[19:56:40] <wjp> a list<string> for a list of strings
[19:56:53] <artaxerxes> are vectors one-dim arrays ?
[19:56:58] <wjp> a list<map<int,pair<string,int>>> for a list of maps of integers to pairs of strings and integers
[19:57:01] * Darke uses the standard templates all the time. It's a bit rarer to actually create them yourself though.
[19:57:37] <Darke> *nod* They're almost equilivant to a resizable C array.
[19:58:20] <artaxerxes> <wjp> a list<map<int,pair<string,int>>> for a list of maps of integers to pairs of strings and integers .... you use that every day... ;)
[19:58:38] <wjp> what, you mean you don't? ;-)
[19:59:51] <Darke> Here's an example, straight out of code: *grin* `std::map<unsigned int, pair<unsigned int, std::string> > GlobalName;`
[20:00:57] <artaxerxes> where is the param given to the map function in there ?
[20:01:41] <wjp> map isn't a function, it's a class
[20:02:09] <artaxerxes> no wonder I don't get C++...
[20:02:41] <artaxerxes> I tried though
[20:03:12] <artaxerxes> but even at my best, I can't read std::map<unsigned int, pair<unsigned int, std::string> > GlobalName;
[20:03:39] <Colourless> think of a class as similar to a struct in c
[20:04:05] <artaxerxes> I understand the concept of classes.
[20:04:40] <artaxerxes> but I thought that was virtually the only difference b/w C and C++
[20:05:00] <Colourless> it's probably best to start with a simpler example than std::map :-)
[20:05:33] <wjp> a map takes two template parameters; both are classes
[20:05:39] <wjp> the first template parameters is 'unsigned int'
[20:05:48] <wjp> the second is 'pair<unsigned int, string'
[20:06:04] <wjp> Darke: not really consistent to use std::map and std::string, but not std::pair, btw ;-)
[20:06:39] <artaxerxes> map, string and pair are all classes ?
[20:06:44] <wjp> yes
[20:07:49] <artaxerxes> and GlobalName is the name of the instance of the class map ?
[20:07:56] <wjp> yeah
[20:08:37] <artaxerxes> I think I can read it now... :) Stil ldoesn't make of me a C++ programmer.. :)
[20:08:47] <artaxerxes> you guys knew c++ before exult ?
[20:08:54] * wjp nods
[20:09:11] <wjp> although I picked up most of this template/STL stuff while working on exult :-)
[20:10:53] * Colourless too
[20:11:07] <Colourless> i didn't know c++ before exult :-)
[20:11:17] <Colourless> probably shows too :-)
[20:11:28] <artaxerxes> must have been a big step
[20:11:43] <Colourless> compare my old code, to my newer stuff and you'll see a difference :-)
[20:12:19] --> sb-x has joined #exult
[20:12:25] <sb-x> Hello
[20:12:27] <artaxerxes> hey
[20:12:43] <Colourless> big step, yes and no. before exult i was already doing things with hacky sort of object orientated programming in c (i.e. using stucts and function pointers)
[20:13:05] <wjp> hi
[20:13:13] <Colourless> hi
[20:13:29] <sb-x> hey thats what i do
[20:13:44] <sb-x> =|
[20:15:10] <Colourless> :-)
[20:19:00] <artaxerxes> I haven't programmed in ages... :(
[20:19:33] <sb-x> hmm
[20:19:37] <sb-x> does u7 usecode count?
[20:19:41] <artaxerxes> btw, if one of you guys are interested, I am looking for someone to code a patcher. Something clean, neat, fast and portable... :)
[20:19:48] <artaxerxes> I doubt it
[20:19:51] <wjp> only if you wrote it in bytecode ;-)
[20:19:54] <artaxerxes> just a bit of perl
[20:20:43] <artaxerxes> mind you. I'll have to take care of the .code part of the uc when we are going to add female avatar checkings for conversations.
[20:21:06] <artaxerxes> but that's post 1.0.0 too
[20:21:32] <sb-x> 1.0.0?
[20:21:36] <sb-x> what is that a version of
[20:21:44] <artaxerxes> si-french 1.0.0
[20:21:51] <sb-x> oh
[20:21:52] <sb-x> neat
[20:21:53] <Colourless> well, get darke to hurry up with the decompiler, and then complain to jeff that the compiler doesn't work :-)
[20:21:53] <artaxerxes> the patch we are making
[20:22:15] <wjp> if the compiler doesn't work you can complain to me too
[20:22:21] <wjp> if it needs new features, talk to Jeff :-)
[20:22:28] <artaxerxes> I actually was about to do it by hand.
[20:22:42] <artaxerxes> straight usecode
[20:22:50] <wjp> might be cleanest
[20:23:24] <artaxerxes> shouldn't be too hard either... just enormously time consuming
[20:24:49] * Darke unidles and was actually doing C++ programming before exult, he was actually working as a C++ programmer when he started ucxt.
[20:24:56] <artaxerxes> mind you, using a C-style conv engine would be nice
[20:25:27] <sb-x> i think there could be a better way to script conversations than C
[20:25:51] <artaxerxes> I meant the compiler/decompiler that you guys are working on
[20:27:10] * sb-x reads the log.
[20:27:12] * Darke 's decompiler 'works' for the most part. It just doesn't handle conversations at all. *grin* Turning the goto/labels into an if/while structure is far harder then I originally thought.
[20:27:59] <artaxerxes> which reminds me: what's with the "loop" business in the usecode ?
[20:28:07] <artaxerxes> or sloop
[20:29:00] <wjp> they're loops :-)
[20:29:34] <sb-x> i dont remember a sloop
[20:29:58] <artaxerxes> like a while/if/for ?
[20:29:58] <Darke> sb-x: enum/next, IIRC.
[20:30:06] <sb-x> Oooh
[20:30:12] <wjp> yeah, it loops over an array
[20:30:14] <sb-x> Darke: I remember you had to explain that to me. Makes sense
[20:30:20] <Darke> artaxerxes: *nod* 'for' is the closest, IIRC.
[20:30:28] <artaxerxes> IC
[20:30:30] <sb-x> s/Makes sense/Made sense after you explained it./
[20:30:45] <sb-x> or foreach
[20:30:49] <Darke> sb-x: *grin*
[20:30:50] <sb-x> if not using C
[20:31:10] <sb-x> it doesnt seem like the C 'for' to me
[20:31:32] <artaxerxes> more like the B 'for'.....
[20:31:34] <sb-x> but like the 'for' in bash
[20:31:36] * artaxerxes grins stupidly
[20:31:42] <Colourless> Darke: so that is why you are working on fold. because it's easier to decompile a language that make sense :-)
[20:31:52] <Darke> Colourless: Out of my mind. *grin*
[20:32:17] <sb-x> im lost
[20:32:53] * Darke considers that he remembers telling Colourless something similar, so he's actually not _in_ his mind. Oh well. *grin*
[20:33:09] * sb-x resets himself.
[20:33:17] * Darke sets up a signpost for sb-x.
[20:34:13] * sb-x thinks #exult must be full of things people leave behind.
[20:34:27] <sb-x> Signposts, cities, exclamation points... etc
[20:35:00] <artaxerxes> in short you have made a disassembler but now you want to convert the disassembled code into a higher language and vice-versa..
[20:35:30] <sb-x> someone else made the disassembler
[20:35:31] <artaxerxes> neat
[20:35:41] <artaxerxes> wud ?
[20:35:43] <Darke> sb-x: It's realitively tidy around here. The city you pushed in, slid out the other door, and I collect all the random punctuation and drop it into the punctuation bowl. There's just a few signposts and such stuffed behind the couch.
[20:35:47] <artaxerxes> I thought it was you
[20:35:56] <sb-x> i havnt done anything
[20:36:01] <sb-x> im just a fan
[20:36:22] <sb-x> exult fanatic, not a fan that blows air
[20:36:24] <artaxerxes> not YOU.... you guys
[20:36:30] <artaxerxes> :)
[20:36:39] <sb-x> they havent then
[20:36:44] <artaxerxes> you ACTUALLY happen to blow air though.. :)
[20:36:48] <sb-x> I guess the W in wud is for Wody
[20:36:51] <artaxerxes> it is called respiring
[20:36:56] <sb-x> heh
[20:37:00] <sb-x> some people say i blow hot air
[20:37:32] <sb-x> Darke: I didn't even know we had a couch... see... there must be tons of stuff lying around here.
[20:37:35] <artaxerxes> I thought he only made rip..
[20:38:10] * wjp notices a big glowing sign with "Darke" on it here above the couch
[20:38:50] <Darke> Moscow Dragon wrote ucdump with help from Wody Dragon.
[20:39:06] * Darke stashes that sign behind the couch. Evil thing.
[20:40:47] <sb-x> wjp: does emacs have project files?
[20:40:59] <wjp> project files? what would they do?
[20:41:20] <sb-x> you give it one command and it loads all of exults source
[20:41:43] <sb-x> in the subdirectories too
[20:41:46] <wjp> heh, I guess somebody probably would have hacked that in sometime
[20:42:02] <wjp> you can always write an elisp macro ;-)
[20:42:09] <sb-x> do you just edit one file at a time?
[20:42:15] <sb-x> and then close and open another
[20:42:19] <wjp> yeah
[20:42:30] <sb-x> do you use xemacs?
[20:42:31] <wjp> well, it's just Ctrl-X-F filename to open a new file
[20:42:33] <wjp> no, emacs
[20:42:44] <wjp> I don't close files
[20:43:29] <sb-x> okay
[20:43:31] <sb-x> i might use emacs
[20:43:38] <sb-x> if i can configure the colors
[20:44:11] <Darke> s/if i/when you find out how you/
[20:44:16] --> Fingolfin has joined #exult
[20:44:19] <wjp> hi Fingolfin
[20:44:22] <artaxerxes> hi
[20:44:22] <sb-x> Darke: i want to use your color scheme
[20:44:24] <Darke> Hi.
[20:44:27] <sb-x> hi
[20:44:27] <Colourless> hi
[20:44:35] <artaxerxes> use .Xdefaults
[20:44:35] <Fingolfin> yo
[20:44:37] --- ChanServ gives channel operator status to Fingolfin
[20:45:03] * Fingolfin just came back from JabberConf Munich, was a lot of fun :-)
[20:45:08] <wjp> (require 'font-lock)
[20:45:08] <wjp> (set-face-foreground 'font-lock-function-name-face "blue")
[20:45:08] <wjp> (set-face-foreground 'font-lock-comment-face "red")
[20:45:08] <wjp> (set-face-foreground 'font-lock-string-face "forest green")
[20:45:08] <wjp> (set-face-foreground 'font-lock-variable-name-face "SteelBlue")
[20:45:15] <wjp> that's my "colour scheme"
[20:45:26] <Darke> Fingolfin: 'JabberConf'?
[20:45:27] <wjp> Fingolfin: cool :-)
[20:45:31] <sb-x> JabberConf?
[20:45:51] <Colourless> do i have to ask too? :-)
[20:45:56] <Fingolfin> http://www.jabberconf.com/europe/
[20:46:02] <Colourless> JabberConf? :-)
[20:46:07] <wjp> JabberConf?
[20:46:14] <exultbot> JabberConf?
[20:46:24] <Fingolfin> JabberConf!
[20:46:34] <artaxerxes> JabberConf?
[20:46:37] <Colourless> bah, a webpage... i'm too bandwith impaired to view one of them right now
[20:46:51] <Fingolfin> OK, I think I have to kick *all* of you now! :-)
[20:47:12] <sb-x> eek, why do people use pictures for text
[20:47:24] <sb-x> simple text too
[20:47:38] <Colourless> hmm, sounds like a really good realy for me to avoid the site :-)
[20:47:50] <sb-x> oh
[20:47:56] <sb-x> its for Jabber
[20:48:02] <wjp> Fingolfin: any insights on .cc vs .cpp?
[20:48:02] * Darke looks innocent. He didn't do anything. *grin*
[20:48:07] <sb-x> The first phase of Jabber is complete. There is a new mission, a next generation.
[20:48:08] <sb-x> :-)
[20:48:46] <wjp> (as the C++ file extension for pentagram, btw)
[20:48:58] <sb-x> why would you use cpp?
[20:48:59] <artaxerxes> cpp are more windows style
[20:49:04] <Fingolfin> wjp: what insight, besides "it's two different traditions, and on mac many people also use .cp, and there are a few weirdos that use .C or .cxx or even .c++, too" ?
[20:49:13] <artaxerxes> while .cc or .C are more unix style
[20:49:26] <wjp> .C is probably a bad idea :-)
[20:49:30] <artaxerxes> indeed
[20:49:31] <Colourless> .C IS unix style :-)
[20:49:31] <Fingolfin> .C is evil =)
[20:49:50] <Fingolfin> I don't care either way, .cc, .cpp, .cp, it's all the same for me
[20:50:01] <sb-x> no extension is unix style
[20:50:03] * sb-x laughs evilly.
[20:50:08] <Colourless> only people on unix (and mac it seems) would differentiate between filetype by the case of the extension :-)
[20:50:38] * Darke has never seen .C before.
[20:50:44] <sb-x> for C++
[20:51:03] <sb-x> me either
[20:51:04] * wjp should go
[20:51:07] <Darke> sb-x: Not once. *grin* Even all the old C++ code I've looked through has used .cc.
[20:51:09] <wjp> g'night
[20:51:12] <Darke> Night!
[20:51:14] <sb-x> bye
[20:51:18] <Colourless> cya
[20:51:20] <artaxerxes> bye
[20:51:21] <-- wjp has left IRC ("Zzzz...")
[20:51:33] <sb-x> who has seen .hh?
[20:51:38] <Colourless> i've seen a fair amount of old C++ code that used a .c extension
[20:51:41] <Fingolfin> Colourless: no nobody on mac uses .C
[20:51:50] <Fingolfin> Colourless: the "on mac" was refering only to the ".cp"
[20:51:51] <sb-x> BlackBox uses .hh for headers
[20:52:03] <Colourless> Fingolfin: ah ok :-)
[20:52:15] * Darke has seen .hh a couple of times, it's almost as icky as .hpp. At least it's shorter to type. *grin*
[20:52:17] <Fingolfin> .hh, I know that, too, and some use .hpp -> IMHO both are crap but if somebody likes it... <shrug>
[20:52:29] <sb-x> Header Header filetype
[20:52:37] <sb-x> Header Plus Plus
[20:52:41] <artaxerxes> :)
[20:53:00] <Colourless> H++ anyone?
[20:53:13] <sb-x> i would use .c++ if anyone else i knew used it
[20:53:14] <Colourless> (as extension)
[20:53:19] * Darke has seen C++ code in a .c file before. But that's just an indication of a braindamaged make more then anything else. *grin*
[20:54:18] <Darke> Colourless: No thanks. *grin*
[20:54:19] <Colourless> oddly enough .c with c++ code seems to be linked to using TurboC++
[20:55:09] <artaxerxes> I remember reading a gcc man page about extensions and it mentioned .C. That's how I got to learn about i
[20:55:18] <artaxerxes> s/about i/about it/
[20:56:18] * Darke thought that was just a 'thinko' on the part of the documentor. *grin*
[20:57:00] * sb-x snerks.
[20:58:20] <Colourless> i could imagine that .c=C and .C=C++ would be really annoying for people prorting dos C code to *nix.
[20:59:04] <Colourless> copy some dos code, make decides to use the c++ compiler, instead of the c compiler
[21:00:44] <Darke> Rather visa-versa I would guess. And for systems with a 'uppercase only' mode too. Although I don't think any of those were still in wide use when Strustroup was designing C++.
[21:01:05] <sb-x> hehe
[21:01:08] <sb-x> C64?
[21:01:19] <Darke> sb-x: Big iron and PDPs.
[21:01:26] <Darke> sb-x: Among others.
[21:01:32] <artaxerxes> THAT old ?
[21:01:48] <sb-x> i seem to remember some old apple being uppercase only
[21:01:55] <sb-x> but it wasnt 2c
[21:02:56] <Darke> artaxerxes: Come on, we're only talking 20-30 year old hardware here. *grin* PDPs are still (or were still until a few years ago) used in quite a lot of the .us air traffic control hardware, IIRC. And IBM still sells dinosaurs, except they're quite smaller nowdays and can handle lower case. *grin*
[21:03:33] <sb-x> Hmm.. most of .us hardware are probably dinosaurs.
[21:03:53] <sb-x> in the beauracracy i mean
[21:04:02] <Darke> sb-x: *nod* Quite a lot of the older BASIC hardware was UCase only. Although C64 had an option to either turn special characters on, or lowercase, IIRC, it was a switch on the 'keyboard'.
[21:04:38] <sb-x> Whats a PDP?
[21:04:43] <sb-x> I keep thinking PDA
[21:04:53] <Colourless> did the option for lowercase actually do much though with c64?
[21:06:01] <Darke> sb-x: A 'miniprocessor'. Produced by DEC/Digital (now Compaq owns them, IIRC).
[21:06:22] <Darke> Colourless: No idea. I never used it, and can't remember many people who did. The lowercase characters on it were rather ugly. *grin*
[21:06:42] * sb-x sighs. All he knows about are PC compatibles.
[21:07:37] * sb-x has not even used a Mac either.
[21:08:54] * Darke seems to remember they had 36bits to a word and either ran ITS or VMS. Then the 'VAX' group inside the company 'won' and they stopped shipping PDPs in favour of VAXen, running VMS. He might be wrong though, it's been a while since he read much about this. *grin*
[21:11:44] <artaxerxes> what's the average age of the exult dev team ?
[21:12:02] <Colourless> 5
[21:12:05] * artaxerxes is surprised some know about PDPs that much
[21:12:09] <artaxerxes> :)
[21:12:21] <Darke> No idea. I'm on the 'lower' end I think at 23+/-1.
[21:12:44] <Colourless> bah, i'm lower than you at 22
[21:13:49] * Darke yays! It's so unusual for him not to be the youngest. *grin*
[21:15:00] <Colourless> dom is 28 or something
[21:15:22] <artaxerxes> and Jeff is "higher end" ? :)
[21:15:32] <Colourless> jeff IS the high end :-)
[21:15:47] * Darke gets the impression of that, yes. *grin*
[21:17:29] <Colourless> of course we have no idea what the average age of the exult team is, since we don't know everyones age
[21:18:48] <artaxerxes> the si-french team is made up of people virtually the same age. Around 23.
[21:19:22] <artaxerxes> fresh blood for the computers... the newest form of human sacrifices.
[21:19:43] <artaxerxes> s/newest/modern/
[21:19:51] * Darke guesses our average is a little higher then that. Jeff will probably pull it up a bit. *innocentblink*
[21:20:00] * Darke snickers.
[21:20:32] <Darke> Of course, what you're _really_ sacrificing is not blood, but sanity. Think of it as an Elder God in a box. *grin*
[21:21:02] <Colourless> especially since you are using usecode
[21:21:09] <Colourless> spawn of the devil it is :-)
[21:21:22] <Darke> U7's is anyway. *grin*
[21:21:42] <artaxerxes> to the Guardian...
[21:21:58] <Colourless> u8's is marginally better. but it's got the coolness factor since it's multithreaded :-)
[21:22:12] <sb-x> and it controlled Crusader
[21:22:37] <Colourless> of course multithreading just creates another level for you to become insane in :-)
[21:22:43] <Darke> sb-x: Crusader's usecode is minorly and painfully different. *grin*
[21:23:07] <Darke> Colourless: Of course! But it's a much more fun and 'cool' way of becoming insane! *grin*
[21:23:32] <Colourless> exactly!
[21:23:47] <Colourless> what's more fun than desiging your own kernel to go along with your virtual machine!
[21:24:48] <Colourless> out of interest, is java multithreaded?
[21:25:04] <Darke> And compiler! And disassembler/decompiler! Fun! *grin*
[21:25:26] * Darke is pretty sure it is.
[21:25:39] <Colourless> u7's usecode is positively primitive :-)
[21:26:01] <artaxerxes> go translate 1260 from old english to something undestandable for a child.... come back to me when you're done ! :)
[21:26:11] <artaxerxes> s/1260/1260 files/
[21:27:28] <Darke> artaxerxes: Just be glad you don't have to translate U8's usecode. The strings are imbedded in the code, rather then in a nice 'data' segment. *grin*
[21:28:01] <artaxerxes> eeeewww
[21:28:13] <Colourless> but i wonder... does crusader need translating :-)
[21:28:17] * Darke notes that translating TGWDS usecode would be a breeze, there's almost no strings in it at all. *grin*
[21:28:44] <Darke> The 'emails' would, but I would guess that would be about all. *grin*
[21:29:28] <Colourless> there a ALOT of emails
[21:29:48] <artaxerxes> what's TGWDS, btw ?
[21:30:12] <Darke> The Games We Don't Support. *grin* AKA Crusader: No Remorse, Crusader: No Regret.
[21:31:05] <Colourless> Darke: any idea why the usecode for TGWDS is different to U8
[21:31:17] <Colourless> is there an obvious reason why things were changed
[21:32:37] <artaxerxes> past 5.30pm here... time for HeroesIII on my spare linux machine at work.... :)
[21:32:49] <Darke> Colourless: It depends, are you referring to the debugging stuff in Remorse1.21? *grin* The shuffling of the 'end' opcode is just because they added another one just before.
[21:32:57] <sb-x> I thought when you said TGWDS you meant U8 too
[21:33:07] <sb-x> you mean ill actually be able to play U8 with pentagram?!?
[21:33:11] <sb-x> and your admitting that
[21:33:18] <Darke> sb-x: If you're unlucky. *grin*
[21:33:23] <Colourless> hehe
[21:33:44] <Colourless> as it's stated in the faq, u8 might be playable if someone writes some code
[21:33:56] * Darke has not sat down and worked out what the debugging data at the end of each of the relevant functions means yet.
[21:34:00] * Colourless notes that no 'pentagram' code has yet been written
[21:34:04] <sb-x> Crusader has subtitles that can be translated
[21:34:27] <sb-x> not in the usecode
[21:35:06] <Darke> Remorse1.21 actually has the debugging usecode functions still in it too, such as the 'movie test' function. Although that might also be in Remorse1.01.
[21:35:54] * Darke checks. It is.
[21:36:56] <Colourless> i'm pretty sure the usecode debugger isn't in the remorse 1.21 exe
[21:37:14] <artaxerxes> see you guys...
[21:37:16] <Darke> IIRC most of the strings are in the VMAIL, TEXTFIL1 and TEXTFIL2 classes.
[21:37:20] <Darke> Bye!
[21:37:20] <sb-x> see you
[21:37:22] <artaxerxes> bye
[21:37:23] <Colourless> cya
[21:37:23] <-- artaxerxes has left IRC ("using sirc version 2.211+KSIRC/1.1")
[21:37:32] <sb-x> Are common file formats stored the same on big and little endian systems?
[21:38:18] <Darke> Only if they're stored deliberately 'endian independant' on the systems. Normally the file formats themselves will specify whether they're big or little.
[21:38:43] <sb-x> do you know if PNG and TGA are like that?
[21:38:48] <Colourless> yes
[21:38:51] <Darke> Yes.
[21:38:56] <Colourless> they are endian independant
[21:39:45] <Colourless> both little endian afaik
[21:39:48] <sb-x> does that mean they have a flag that says "this file is LSB format" or they are just assumed to be that way
[21:39:50] <sb-x> oh okay
[21:39:52] <sb-x> thanks
[21:40:14] <Colourless> some formats have a flag, but I can't tell you which ones
[21:40:20] * sb-x nods.
[21:40:22] <sb-x> ive got to go
[21:40:28] <sb-x> bye
[21:40:32] <Darke> Just assumed for most formats. The spec usually says 'all values are written LSB first' or something.
[21:40:33] <-- sb-x has left IRC ("X-Chat [1.6.4]")
[21:40:33] <Darke> Bye!
[21:40:34] <Colourless> generally the older the format the higher probibility they are going to be big endian
[21:43:15] <-- Fingolfin has left IRC ("good night")
[21:51:44] <Colourless> time to go
[21:51:56] <Darke> Cya.
[21:53:25] <-- Colourless has left IRC ("cya")