Re: To cross develop or not - was Re: eBay WTH?

[heuser.marcus@freenet.de]

On Aug 22, 8:38 am, "Michael J. Mahon" <mjma...@aol.com> wrote:
> heuser.mar...@freenet.de wrote:
>
> Playing endlessly with micro-optimizations is an only occasionally
> useful time sink.  ;-)

Absolutely and I don't intend to spend more time on it than necessary.
A good algorithm if often more effectice than optimizing a bad one,
of course.

> Fleshing out a design "on paper" is an excellent way of building
> several generations of "virtual prototypes" so that less effort is
> wasted going down major detailed blind alleys.

I once did several versions of a tile-mapping routine (like those
found in the earlier Ultima games) because I was curious if I can
do it with acceptable speed in hires graphics mode which of course
uses much more memory than the charcter graphics modes of the Atari
and C64 platforms.

It was a terrific experience as I only used graph paper (with 5 mm
squares), a pencil, a 6502 mnemonics and cycle table and my trusty
25 year old calculator - while lying on my bed (I call it "testbed"
since then and I don't make this up now!).

Granted, I took my time with it and the cycle count didn't always
come down but in the end, when I was satisfied with the speed/space
ratio (version 7, IIRC), I hacked it in and it worked from the get-go.

It really was a mixture of exercise and experiment and in the end
it provided me with some 6502 training and showed me that it is very
well possible to think a problem through, choose a good algorithm,
implement it, debug it, improve it and have something working in the
end. Immensely gratifying.

> The trick for me is sustaining enthusiasm for a long time without
> actually coding anything.  I find that putting pencil to paper is
> both focusing and stimulating, but I'm sure folks differ in that
> respect.  (My real wastebasket does tend to fill up with paper.  ;-)

I hear you!

> I've always been mystified by how subtle changes in rules can
> dramatically alter the strategy and play of a game.  It's safe
> to say that I don't know how to design a game for "playability".

This is indeed one of the delicate subjects but you mostly modify
with existing elements here instead of completely redesigning the
game.
The real playability check will come when the game is in beta test.
This will be definitely scary for me but no need to think about that
now ;-)

> If you have fun and learn something, then your "failure" was a
> splendid success--and if you succeed, it's all gravy!

I like gravy!

> > Also, the AppleWin screen doesn't look anywhere near the finished
> > result on a TV-set/monitor of yore.
> > I understand that most guys worked years with old TV sets and are
> > fed up with that and want crystal clear, pixellized VGA screens
> > (the discussion pops up regularly) but my position for that project
> > is different. I don't want it to look authentic - including NTSC
> > and all of it's "unplanned color nuances" (don't know a better
> > wording for it).
>
> I'm not sure how those two thoughts fit together.

No surprise - the "don't" is a relict of the first wording here
(I was in a hurry this morning). Of course I "do" want it to look
authentic. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

> AppleWin graphics are the usual "RGB-style" Apple graphics, which
> are crisp to a fault (IMHO) and extremely limited in palette.
>
> NTSC graphics (which I presume many of your users will see, but
> who knows?) are much smoother and offer lots of dithered colors.
>
> These are polar opposites, in the sense that "crisp" and "smooth"
> don't go together.

See above.

> I notice the same effect.  I seldom reposition the cursor to correct
> a line--I just backspace and re-type.  A music teacher would call that
> "rehearsing" the correct keystrokes rather than an _ad hoc_ correction,
> I suppose.

When I was young I totally admired people typing very quickly.
Probably like music students admiring people playing the piano
skillfully - another similarity.
And the "rehearsing" aspect is definitely correct, too, as often
used words practically type themselves...

> Actually, creating data structures is one of the primary uses
> for macros.  (I once even used more text-capable macros to create
> the *documentation* for the structures!)

Like I said - I don't reinvent the wheel here.

> The only positive result of going public with your aspirations
> (which you've already done ;-) is to create additional motivation
> to complete the project.

I'm very experienced in kicking myself in the butt to make
me work on something.
But I wouldn't do it publicly if I weren't so sure that I
already have reached the point of no return ;-)

bye
Marcus