Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Control Flow

2 (2.2%)

Arrays, Strings, Pointers, and References

8 (9%)

Functions

4 (4.5%)

Basic object-oriented programming

30 (33.7%)

A bit more advanced OOP (Composition, Operator overloading, Inheritance, Virtual Functions)

18 (20.2%)

Templates

8 (9%)

Other (Explain)

4 (4.5%)

Working with files?  (Streams)

15 (16.9%)

Total Members Voted: 89

[DrPizza]

Ohoohoo this is just my thing. Let me open up GCC and get started. I'm not sure what I'll do yet, though. I'm great with C/C++.

Practically by definition, you are not.

There is no such language as "C/C++". There is C, and there is C++, and they share some aspects of their grammar and libraries, but the differences are legion. The languages are not source code compatible, and their coding styles are so radically different that knowledge of one confers practically no knowledge of the other.

[HideousBeing]

Ohoohoo this is just my thing. Let me open up GCC and get started. I'm not sure what I'll do yet, though. I'm great with C/C++.

Practically by definition, you are not.

There is no such language as "C/C++". There is C, and there is C++, and they share some aspects of their grammar and libraries, but the differences are legion. The languages are not source code compatible, and their coding styles are so radically different that knowledge of one confers practically no knowledge of the other.

Don't get nitpicky; he could be good at both languages. Save this for when people ask if they should learn C or C++ or what the differances are between them.

Thanks for the thread. There are some fun challanges and learncpp.com is pretty good. I've known some very basic C++ for a few years but haven't really touched it mostly because of lack of inspiration. Now I'm going to go try and make some stuff that actually utilizes OOP decently.

[Blacken]

He's right. There are maybe two thousand people around the world who are "great" C or C++ programmers. I would bet any amount you wished that none of them post here.

[DrPizza]

Don't get nitpicky; he could be good at both languages.

He could, but it's vanishingly unlikely, because people who are good at both languages--or even one of the languages--know better than to lump them together like that.

[HideousBeing]

This is a c++ tutorial that teaches beginners by making a roguelike that was over in the roguelike development thread.

Terror in ASCII Dungeon!:

part 1
part 2
part 3
part 4

EDIT: Sorry, ending derail. My bad.

[Blacken]

Nobody's "bashing" anyone. A critical aspect to programming (and any field, really) is understanding and accepting how very little you actually do know. I've been programming for 11 years and I wouldn't call myself "great" at anything; I'm a pretty good .NET developer, I'm okay at a lot of other things, but "great"? Don't be silly.

[Outcast Orange]

Please take your issue to private messages.

This is where I come for programly things, or to offer help or answer questions.

Every time there is a new post in this thread,
 I am a bit excited to read something by one of my favorite B12 contributors,
 and there has only been drama the last half-dozen posts.

It is very late, and I will be enjoying a banana soon.

[eerr]

Is anybody working on Iphone apps?

Just got a mac recently.

[timmeh]

From what I've heard, getting an iPhone app approved can be a royal pain... just hear-say though, don't know if there's any truth in it.  Still, if I were going to develop for a smart-phone, I'd probably shoot for the Droid, seems to have a more "open-source oriented" community.

[eerr]

From what I've heard, getting an iPhone app approved can be a royal pain... just hear-say though, don't know if there's any truth in it.  Still, if I were going to develop for a smart-phone, I'd probably shoot for the Droid, seems to have a more "open-source oriented" community.

My brother is a machine, I would actually be developing a feature he doesn't have time to add.
And way slower at it, but still.

[Siquo]

Problem: World and Material Types.

So, I need a collection of MaterialTypes, that contain data such as texturenumber, density, hardness et cetera, and link those to every object in the world.
Solutions:
- A: A std::map with <integer, MaterialType>, and an int per object
- B: A pointer to the MaterialType per object
- C: Something else?

I really don't want the collection to be a "global", as globals are evil, but I'm not sure how else to do it.
Maybe use solution A, create the collection as a static singleton, with a (static?) pointer to the collection from every object? (AKA: cpp global)
And if the object doesn't know where the collection is, how can I use option B to get a pointer to one of the MaterialTypes?

An object only knows it's x,y,z relative to its parent, and has a pointer to its parent. The top-level parent is "world", I could create the collection there, but traversing the entire tree of pointer-to-parents for every check is not efficient... Unless I make a pointer to the MaterialType, and set it only at object creation (or if the type changes).

[darius]

I'm sure pointers are faster. As for map, I use it in singleton. One of more complex implementations was that each material had it's two id's (type, subtype) and cells had pointer to material. Materials in singleton with two maps (one inside another). The idea was to be able to add/ remove materials on the fly.
But if you are using std::map <integer ,sth> is it not better (faster) to use std::vector <sth> ,or std::vector <sth*>?

[Siquo]

True, but not if I have 1000s of materials, created on the fly using the id as seed-salt.

So there might be material 134, 14895 and 400372, and nothing else. If it's not found, it's created on the fly.

Poor fly.

[qwertyuiopas]

Whenever someone says that globals are evil, they are generalizing too much.

If you know why they say they are, then you might find some circumstances where a global variable is best anyway.

[Siquo]

Oh, I know. Evil just means "good on only VERY RARE occasions". I do play DF, you know

Although just typing the question here already gave me some answers. As I'll be having a LOT of objects, every pointer and int counts. But so does accessing speed.

As I have a "world", and everything is contained by that, I should put all "global" into the "world", since those two words almost mean the same anyway
All objects get a static pointer to the world. There's my evil "global". This prevents having to recursively "getParent()" until you reach the World all the time. Static == global and uglyish but I don't plan on multiple worlds anyway, so I should be good there. Static pointers also only take up space once, so it costs me nothing.
From then on, all global calls can go through World, and I still don't have to make use of singletons or something.


I also am preventing a headache by not thinking about abstracted mixed-material objects.