00:01 <+bridge_> [ddnet] can any smart ddnet devs explain how freeze is interpolated in 50 ticks per second 00:01 <+bridge_> [ddnet] (like how not being able to skip a freeze or tele works) 00:01 <+bridge_> [ddnet] does it calculate a linear path between ticks and apply all the tiles? 00:16 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i think that's exactly what it's doing 00:16 <+bridge_> [ddnet] however, it does not apply all the tiles 00:16 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i think it first looks for kill, then tele, then freeze 00:47 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Hey @r2d2!~, have you and DDNet Staff talked about getting ur mapping tool into the DDNet Client? 00:47 <+bridge_> [ddnet] And is there a full release planned? 08:14 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Why so if ddnet already implements a map editor 08:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Or maybe ur talking about smth else 09:01 <+bridge_> [ddnet] the tool is written in C# and for Windows (even tho i dunno if it couldn't be used in other OS), so it is unlikely that it will be added 09:02 <+bridge_> [ddnet] + what's the point if ddnet includes a map editor also 09:16 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Mono can maybe run it 09:17 <+bridge_> [ddnet] but it also uses d3d11 09:17 <+bridge_> [ddnet] also the license dont match, but still very impressive editor 09:17 <+bridge_> [ddnet] our editor is pretty bad xD 09:18 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Have you taken a look at editor2 on 0.7? I quite like it. I wonder if we should try to get it into ddnet 09:19 <+bridge_> [ddnet] yeah it defs an improvement, but this editor from r2d2 still looks better imo 09:19 <+bridge_> [ddnet] it's missing some features, but just looks cleaner 09:25 <+bridge_> [ddnet] If you did end up getting a new editor into ddnet, would that completely override the current editor, or would that be an optional thing where you can switch between new and old? The intuitive answer is that it'd override it, but I feel like my people wouldn't like that since people got very used to the current editor over the years, and humans don't tend to like change. 09:25 <+bridge_> [ddnet] By the way I haven't seen editor2, so i don't even know if it's really similar to the current one, I'm just genuinely interested how this would be done 09:25 <+bridge_> [ddnet] its relativly similar 09:26 <+bridge_> [ddnet] just new ideas, that are intuitive, and some style changes 09:27 <+bridge_> [ddnet] And most importantly code that is much better structured imo 09:29 <+bridge_> [ddnet] @bencie 09:29 <+bridge_> [ddnet] https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/293493549758939136/948859557961146428/unknown.png 09:29 <+bridge_> [ddnet] this is for example a nice feature 09:29 <+bridge_> [ddnet] select tiles to mirror them 09:29 <+bridge_> [ddnet] also get the new tee customizer 09:29 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Ah yeah, looks pretty clean! 09:30 <+bridge_> [ddnet] The UI is supposed to get a teeworlds makeover btw. It's just easier to prototype like this 09:30 <+bridge_> [ddnet] But I quite like this design so if we add it to ddnet maybe we keep this? 09:31 <+bridge_> [ddnet] The old roundy design of tw is imo a bit outdated anyway :F 09:31 <+bridge_> [ddnet] the rounds have to get abit sharper and more consant 09:31 <+bridge_> [ddnet] to fit the todays popular design language 09:31 <+bridge_> [ddnet] the rounds have to get abit sharper and more consistant 09:32 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Not gonna lie when i tried out the teeditor, i felt very lost and you'd of course need to use it for a while to get used to it. But i feel like not every would bother to learn a differently structured editor if it did override the current one (I'm mostly referring to teeditor here, not editor2 since judging by your screenshot it's extremely close to what we currently have, looks really clean). 09:33 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i havent used teeeditor, since i dont have a microsoft store, only freedom store 😛 09:33 <+bridge_> [ddnet] 09:33 <+bridge_> [ddnet] No but seriously. It kinda looks very similar to me to the ddnet's one (from structure). Are the shortcuts / controls so different= 09:34 <+bridge_> [ddnet] https://store-images.s-microsoft.com/image/apps.5353.13973644486368214.572b6318-e077-44a3-b616-bd4592ee8579.2175f720-5e22-455f-a5dd-516602b76204?w=1920&h=1170&q=100&format=png 09:34 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i mean this basically is just ddnet editor with a way better interface 09:35 <+bridge_> [ddnet] it has a way more effecient and accessible work flow 09:35 <+bridge_> [ddnet] this editor should be the one new mappers are going to use 09:36 <+bridge_> [ddnet] yeah if you zoom into this interface of teeeditor, you see roundings are only sometimes used, and then it always fits (e.g. the active map TAB) 09:36 <+bridge_> [ddnet] 09:36 <+bridge_> [ddnet] teeworlds uses roundings inside of other roundings, and that just looks bad af xD 09:39 <+bridge_> [ddnet] its greast to have a 500mb depedency to run ur program 09:39 <+bridge_> [ddnet] c# sux 09:43 <+bridge_> [ddnet] idk 500mb or more, the future is now nerd 09:44 <+bridge_> [ddnet] idc 500mb or more, the future is now nerd 09:50 <+bridge_> [ddnet] in what universe is c# the future xD 09:50 <+bridge_> [ddnet] cringe 09:50 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i should write the editor in rust using the twmap from patiga but im 2 lazy 09:50 <+bridge_> [ddnet] and im making my own os rn 09:50 <+bridge_> [ddnet] :BASED: 09:51 <+bridge_> [ddnet] make editor-os 09:51 <+bridge_> [ddnet] @Not Keks a microkernel to run only ddnet 09:51 <+bridge_> [ddnet] with maximum perfomance 09:51 <+bridge_> [ddnet] imagine it xd 09:51 <+bridge_> [ddnet] soon ™️ 09:52 <+bridge_> [ddnet] imagine not being bound on time 09:52 <+bridge_> [ddnet] would be an epic project xD 09:52 <+bridge_> [ddnet] xd 09:53 <+bridge_> [ddnet] https://github.com/emilk/egui 09:53 <+bridge_> [ddnet] dope 09:54 <+bridge_> [ddnet] learath knows that electron is the future xd 09:55 <+bridge_> [ddnet] hi I wrote a small calculator 09:55 <+bridge_> [ddnet] download size 2GB 09:55 <+bridge_> [ddnet] RAM usage 8GB 09:56 <+bridge_> [ddnet] @Ryozuki how big is Ryo-OS? under 1MB? XD 09:59 <+bridge_> [ddnet] :pepeW: 09:59 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Eee im confused send c++ brain 09:59 <+bridge_> [ddnet] We are so on the wrong timeline 09:59 <+bridge_> [ddnet] @Not Keks the image is 103k with the bootloader 09:59 <+bridge_> [ddnet] 48k without 09:59 <+bridge_> [ddnet] or something like that 09:59 <+bridge_> [ddnet] nice 10:00 <+bridge_> [ddnet] 30k stripped 10:00 <+bridge_> [ddnet] https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/293493549758939136/948867376840060928/unknown.png 10:00 <+bridge_> [ddnet] ```C 10:00 <+bridge_> [ddnet] ((CGameControllerMymod *)pSelf->GameServer()->m_pController)->myfunc(); 10:00 <+bridge_> [ddnet] ```I created a gamecontroller with some custom function and then from gamecontroller.cpp i call this boi and even tho i never created an instance of CGameControllerMymod since my sv\_gametype is dm myfunc() is still run?! 10:00 <+bridge_> [ddnet] depends is it virtual function? 10:00 <+bridge_> [ddnet] then probs not 10:00 <+bridge_> [ddnet] else it might be run, but UB 10:01 <+bridge_> [ddnet] no 10:01 <+bridge_> [ddnet] :PepeA: 10:01 <+bridge_> [ddnet] https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/293493549758939136/948867600039964692/unknown.png 10:01 <+bridge_> [ddnet] just dont do this xD 10:01 <+bridge_> [ddnet] fakin UB 10:01 <+bridge_> [ddnet] yea i guess 10:01 <+bridge_> [ddnet] @Not Keks i even have a testing setup 10:01 <+bridge_> [ddnet] the guide is rly good 10:01 <+bridge_> [ddnet] boot time is also smth i don't like in modern OS, but no idea what exactly causes them to be so slow 😄 10:01 <+bridge_> [ddnet] (tests using qemu) 10:01 <+bridge_> [ddnet] bro i also want to start, sounds really funny xxd 10:02 <+bridge_> [ddnet] https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/293493549758939136/948867846656630854/unknown.png 10:02 <+bridge_> [ddnet] https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/293493549758939136/948867879552577596/unknown.png 10:02 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i can catch stack overflows 10:02 <+bridge_> [ddnet] creating os such a hype these days 10:02 <+bridge_> [ddnet] bcs there is still big potential in OS 10:02 <+bridge_> [ddnet] its because u can learn a lot 10:02 <+bridge_> [ddnet] about how ur kernel works 10:02 <+bridge_> [ddnet] its actually rly interesting 10:03 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i learnt about interrupts 10:03 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Hm, they are pretty fast tho, windows boots quite quickly from an ssd 10:03 <+bridge_> [ddnet] @Not Keks my boot time is long due to me having to type the password to decrypt 10:03 <+bridge_> [ddnet] :monkalaugh: 10:03 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i mean like, why is it not basically isntant 10:03 <+bridge_> [ddnet] from cold boot 10:04 <+bridge_> [ddnet] mine kinda is 10:04 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i dont have a gui login so 10:04 <+bridge_> [ddnet] its even faster 10:04 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i dunno i see a wall of text for like 2 seconds before it switches to GUI 10:05 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Well I guess you could boot to a less than operational state much quicker if you wanted. It's just that some services take time, hw takes time to initialize 10:05 <+bridge_> [ddnet] ❯ systemd-analyze 10:05 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Startup finished in 11.021s (firmware) + 2.739s (loader) + 11.370s (kernel) + 3.266s (userspace) = 28.397s 10:05 <+bridge_> [ddnet] graphical.target reached after 3.266s in userspace 10:05 <+bridge_> [ddnet] hm 10:05 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i reached graphical after 3s 10:05 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i guess thats what counts x d 10:05 <+bridge_> [ddnet] ok but why does it take so long tho? we litteraly have the speed of light on our side + why doesn't it happen async 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] With parallelized service starts, an uncompressed initramfs, non encrypted fs, I can boot into single user within about 10s 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] @Not Keks its probs limited by the disk 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] ```C 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] #include "stdio.h" 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] class IGameController 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] { 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] }; 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] class CDefaultGameController : public IGameController 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] { 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] }; 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] class CCustomGameController : public IGameController 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] { 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] public: 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] void custom() { puts("foo"); } 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] }; 10:06 <+bridge_> [ddnet] 10:07 <+bridge_> [ddnet] int main() 10:07 <+bridge_> [ddnet] { 10:07 <+bridge_> [ddnet] IGameController *pController = new CDefaultGameController(); 10:07 <+bridge_> [ddnet] ((CCustomGameController *)pController)->custom(); 10:07 <+bridge_> [ddnet] return 0; 10:07 <+bridge_> [ddnet] } 10:07 <+bridge_> [ddnet] 10:07 <+bridge_> [ddnet] ```it prints "foo" just fine? \:D no warnings nothing xd 10:07 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i dunno, but if i'd write an OS, i'd pack all drivers and firmware and stuff into one block of disk space and load it at once( or in chunks ) but not like 1k files on its own 10:07 <+bridge_> [ddnet] and then spam all threads i have to initialize all hardware as soon as possible xd 10:07 <+bridge_> [ddnet] I think for windows it's that they want to boot up into a mostly operational state. So graphics needs to be initialized, core services already started 10:08 <+bridge_> [ddnet] @Learath2 ads services too 10:08 <+bridge_> [ddnet] :monkalaugh: 10:08 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i just wonder where the bottleneck really is @Learath2 10:08 <+bridge_> [ddnet] I mean the SSD i have can read like 4GB/s 10:08 <+bridge_> [ddnet] 10:08 <+bridge_> [ddnet] all other components should be faster 10:08 <+bridge_> [ddnet] tracking services...up gogogo! 10:08 <+bridge_> [ddnet] :fuckyousnail: 10:09 <+bridge_> [ddnet] yeah for windows its ok, they need the time to upload the telemetry xd 10:09 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Well first of all that 4GB/s is probably a particular kind of reading, possibly a large block with optimal block size 10:09 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i accept that xd 10:09 <+bridge_> [ddnet] yeah but i that's what i'd care about on my OS 10:10 <+bridge_> [ddnet] e.g. lets say you update your system: 10:10 <+bridge_> [ddnet] I'd say it's ok that this takes 5 seconds longer to make a nice chunk for the boot sequence, instead of increasing the boot sequence 😄 10:10 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i dunno, i cannot really imagine it cannot be improved by a lot 10:10 <+bridge_> [ddnet] g++ is less strict that clang huh? 10:10 <+bridge_> [ddnet] /dev/nvme0n1: 10:10 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Timing cached reads: 52912 MB in 2.00 seconds = 26518.07 MB/sec 10:10 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Timing buffered disk reads: 4862 MB in 3.00 seconds = 1620.41 MB/sec 10:10 <+bridge_> [ddnet] :greenthing: 10:11 <+bridge_> [ddnet] ``` 10:11 <+bridge_> [ddnet] $ g++ cast.cpp 10:11 <+bridge_> [ddnet] $ clang cast.cpp 10:11 <+bridge_> [ddnet] /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/cast-2d52b0.o: in function `main': 10:11 <+bridge_> [ddnet] cast.cpp:(.text+0x15): undefined reference to `operator new(unsigned long)' 10:11 <+bridge_> [ddnet] clang-13: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see invocation) 10:11 <+bridge_> [ddnet] ``` 10:11 <+bridge_> [ddnet] You could, but then it's ugly 😄 You'd have to create a bootchunk from the fs that is humanfriendly 10:11 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Ah no its clang++ 10:11 <+bridge_> [ddnet] performance is all that matters, the rest has to be handled by user friendly tools 10:11 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Then you need to keep that up to date, and it's not really modular so you break something you might have some problems 10:12 <+bridge_> [ddnet] wait both and g++ and clang++ do not complain @Not Keks u sure its UB ? i mean it looks like but it works -.- 10:12 <+bridge_> [ddnet] yes 10:12 <+bridge_> [ddnet] run it with ubsan 10:12 <+bridge_> [ddnet] and it will hate u 10:12 <+bridge_> [ddnet] xd 10:12 <+bridge_> [ddnet] oke 10:12 <+bridge_> [ddnet] I prefer my OS to be serviceable by the simplest of tools. User friendly blob managers need not apply 10:13 <+bridge_> [ddnet] external tools can still give you all user friendlyness you need 10:13 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Regedit on windows vs vim to edit my /etc/grub.cfg, I'll take vim all day 10:13 <+bridge_> [ddnet] then vim needs an auto extension 10:13 <+bridge_> [ddnet] regedit 10:13 <+bridge_> [ddnet] that can e.g. read binary files 10:13 <+bridge_> [ddnet] What happens when the user friendly tool has a bug? How am I supposed to work with this blob of binary data? 10:13 <+bridge_> [ddnet] auto converts it to text 10:14 <+bridge_> [ddnet] well then update the tool xD 10:14 <+bridge_> [ddnet] if vim is buggy you doomed too 10:14 <+bridge_> [ddnet] that's not really an excuse imo 10:14 <+bridge_> [ddnet] The bug broke my boot sequence because your bootblob broke, what am I supposed to do now? 10:14 <+bridge_> [ddnet] vim broke your config file, what are you supposed to do now? 10:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] ``` 10:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] $ clang++ -fsanitize=address,undefined -fsanitize-recover=address,undefined -fno-omit-frame-pointer cast.cpp 10:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] $ ./cast 10:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] foo 10:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] $ UBSAN_OPTIONS=log_path=./SAN:print_stacktrace=1:halt_on_errors=0 ASAN_OPTIONS=log_path=./SAN:print_stacktrace=1:check_initialization_order=1:detect_leaks=1:halt_on_errors=0 ./cast 10:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] foo 10:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] ```like this? 10:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] use vi 10:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i just mean, sure you can always argument with bugs 10:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] I use any of the billion text editors that aren't currently broken 10:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] use echo 10:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] but everything can be buggy 10:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] then write 1 billion tools xD 10:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] mv \~/.vimrc vimrc 10:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] I can boot into any single live cd and it'll have the tool to fix my system 10:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] yes, the tool can be updated on your live CD 10:15 <+bridge_> [ddnet] good point xd 10:16 <+bridge_> [ddnet] I can fix it from the uefi console even, text files are that simple to use 10:16 <+bridge_> [ddnet] @Not Keks\: ubsan no cry 10:16 <+bridge_> [ddnet] then your function is not from that class 10:16 <+bridge_> [ddnet] ?xd 10:16 <+bridge_> [ddnet] or your function does not call any member from that class 10:16 <+bridge_> [ddnet] but still 10:16 <+bridge_> [ddnet] isnt it calling an instance method without object? 10:16 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i'd say it should complain 10:17 <+bridge_> [ddnet] e.g. dynamic_cast should throw 10:17 <+bridge_> [ddnet] so do i 10:17 <+bridge_> [ddnet] no they can't be, it's a cd-r 10:18 <+bridge_> [ddnet] and sorry no internet 10:18 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i mean you can update your live CD, have different version of the tool 10:18 <+bridge_> [ddnet] don't have a cd burner anymore 10:18 <+bridge_> [ddnet] xD 10:18 <+bridge_> [ddnet] @Learath2 live cd is just a general term 10:18 <+bridge_> [ddnet] u can use it on usb 10:18 <+bridge_> [ddnet] well with new OS comes new stuff, but you would have to argument against 1990 Learath then 10:18 <+bridge_> [ddnet] No I only have a single cd-r, I don't have a disk burner, I don't have internet. I can still fix a traditional linux system 10:19 <+bridge_> [ddnet] not 2020 where 1 billion text editors already exists 10:19 <+bridge_> [ddnet] can u tho 10:19 <+bridge_> [ddnet] if its rly broken 10:19 <+bridge_> [ddnet] u usually need a live cd 10:19 <+bridge_> [ddnet] cuz u cant fix while mounted 10:19 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Ofc, go ahead make a mistake in your grub cfg, you can still boot using the grub console 10:19 <+bridge_> [ddnet] :monkalaugh: grub console 10:19 <+bridge_> [ddnet] but what if my grub is broken 10:19 <+bridge_> [ddnet] As long as you have a kernel on the boot partition you can boot to, you are fine 10:19 <+bridge_> [ddnet] and it doesnt even show grub 10:20 <+bridge_> [ddnet] having a live cd is the best backup 10:20 <+bridge_> [ddnet] My point is a binary blob with shiny tools is annoying to work with 10:21 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Because nothing except the shiny tool can be used 10:21 <+bridge_> [ddnet] @Not Keks how often do u even boot ur pc 10:21 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i only do it once a day 10:21 <+bridge_> [ddnet] xd 10:22 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Why is it that every time I start my day discussing anything with any of you here I spend the rest of the day annoyed? 10:22 <+bridge_> [ddnet] :monkaS: 10:22 <+bridge_> [ddnet] I'm so moving arguing with electron worshippers to the night so I can just sleep on it 10:23 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Fellas is it even an actual computer if it doesn't have 128gb of ram and 2tb of vram? 10:24 <+bridge_> [ddnet] @Learath2 move on from electron use https://github.com/lapce/lapce 10:24 <+bridge_> [ddnet] made 100% with rust 10:24 <+bridge_> [ddnet] I personally boot my computer and just move everything onto a ramdisk so it's faster 10:24 <+bridge_> [ddnet] my point is, when i write an OS that gives 30% more FPS in CSGO, boots faster, generally is faster 10:24 <+bridge_> [ddnet] more efficient 10:24 <+bridge_> [ddnet] 10:24 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Then this is the future OS 10:24 <+bridge_> [ddnet] performance is key xd 10:24 <+bridge_> [ddnet] the avarage user doesnt care about system admin problems 10:24 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Your obsession with marginal performance improvements beyond human comprehension annoys me so much that I want to move to a midwestern state and become a puritan so I don't have to interact with you anymore 10:25 <+bridge_> [ddnet] like i care what you think 10:25 <+bridge_> [ddnet] xd 10:25 <+bridge_> [ddnet] performance is everything, that simple 10:25 <+bridge_> [ddnet] @Not Keks when will u own a quantum computer 10:26 <+bridge_> [ddnet] if it improves my FPS, lets start xd 10:26 <+bridge_> [ddnet] im sure if there was a gaming oriented os that had 100% compatibility with games everyone would use it 10:26 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Most people also want reliability, would you use a computer that boots only 10% of the time but gives you a 10% improvement of performance when it does manage to boot? 10:27 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i think you a bit pessimistic 10:27 <+bridge_> [ddnet] why would it boot less of the time, just bcs it uses binary instead of text configs 10:27 <+bridge_> [ddnet] A lot of people also value fidelity, would you play your games at 720p? It would give you more performance? 10:27 <+bridge_> [ddnet] if software would be so buggy then rip xD 10:27 <+bridge_> [ddnet] No your arguments is that "Performance is everything". Ofc it's not, that's an insane proposition 10:28 <+bridge_> [ddnet] well ofc i mean depending on your needs, if you play battle field raytracing you also want 8k if possible 10:28 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Or I'm sending a rover to mars, is performance everything there? 10:28 <+bridge_> [ddnet] but to reach 8k raytracing you need more efficient design 10:28 <+bridge_> [ddnet] why not 10:29 <+bridge_> [ddnet] more performance doesn't imply less reliability 10:29 <+bridge_> [ddnet] that's a weird thinking tbh 10:29 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i dont say write everything in assembly 10:29 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i want to make clear, a better design, can be better 10:30 <+bridge_> [ddnet] we should start by ditching x86 10:30 <+bridge_> [ddnet] More performance doesn't imply less reliability, but your proposition is that nothing except performance matters 10:30 <+bridge_> [ddnet] and designing a modern instruction set 10:30 <+bridge_> [ddnet] remove all backwards compatibility stuff thats holds us down 10:30 <+bridge_> [ddnet] that's one example, x86 could die if a new generation gives same FPS; while giving more FPS on newer titles, then ppl would accept it xd 10:31 <+bridge_> [ddnet] that's one example, x86 could die if a new generation gives same FPS (on current games); while giving more FPS on newer titles, then ppl would accept it xd 10:32 <+bridge_> [ddnet] then let me resphrase it 10:32 <+bridge_> [ddnet] 10:32 <+bridge_> [ddnet] a design that is faster, but doesnt increase complexity in a way that you need to do unsafe operation or switch the coding language, should always be used, bcs it wins in the long run xd 10:32 <+bridge_> [ddnet] since my new OS would use a language similar to rust, i'd only allow that rust like lnaguage 10:33 <+bridge_> [ddnet] That's not a rephrasing, that's a whole new argument, but sure 10:33 <+bridge_> [ddnet] xd 10:34 <+bridge_> [ddnet] So this new design, has 0 drawbacks of ANY form, for ANY use, only performs better, yes, people would prefer it 10:34 <+bridge_> [ddnet] glad we came to a understanding 10:34 <+bridge_> [ddnet] :greenthing: 10:34 <+bridge_> [ddnet] but that would include that binary config files are OK for me, as long there is a tool that can parse it for example 😄 10:34 <+bridge_> [ddnet] so there is a drawback 10:34 <+bridge_> [ddnet] vim either needs an extension or cant be used 10:35 <+bridge_> [ddnet] There is always a drawback, but since it's not one you care about you can just discard it 10:35 <+bridge_> [ddnet] but in 1990 someone also wrote vim to parse a text file 10:35 <+bridge_> [ddnet] its nothing to special in my thinking 10:35 <+bridge_> [ddnet] in 20 years nobody will care, just as we dont care now xd 10:35 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Who cares about the people that administer systems? The average user doesn't care 10:35 <+bridge_> [ddnet] yea 10:35 <+bridge_> [ddnet] neither the bosses 10:35 <+bridge_> [ddnet] until something doesnt work 10:35 <+bridge_> [ddnet] have u visited r/sysadmin 10:35 <+bridge_> [ddnet] its hilairous 10:35 <+bridge_> [ddnet] but the good thing about open source is, that there will be ppl writing better and better tools 10:36 <+bridge_> [ddnet] bcs system admins team up 10:36 <+bridge_> [ddnet] No everything always works @Ryozuki we already established all drawbacks that jupstar doesn't consider drawbacks aren't drawbacks 10:36 <+bridge_> [ddnet] bcs they are pissed xd 10:36 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i am just not so pessimistic xD 10:36 <+bridge_> [ddnet] sure it takes time to settle 10:37 <+bridge_> [ddnet] You just want something for the sake of wanting it. There is no reason to trade human-readability of config files for a marginal improvement in parsing it the 1 time it's read at boot 10:38 <+bridge_> [ddnet] well that's your opinion 10:38 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i simply disagree 10:38 <+bridge_> [ddnet] human readable are non 10:38 <+bridge_> [ddnet] only the tools that parses them make it readable 10:38 <+ChillerDragon> cast.cpp:22:9: error: cannot ‘dynamic_cast’ ‘pController’ (of type ‘class IGameController*’) to type ‘class CCustomGameController*’ (source type is not polymorphic) 10:38 <+ChillerDragon> 22 | dynamic_cast(pController)->custom(); 10:38 <+ChillerDragon> that sounds reasonable 10:38 <+ChillerDragon> or did i cast wrong? 10:38 <+bridge_> [ddnet] ? 10:39 <+bridge_> [ddnet] none* 10:39 <+bridge_> [ddnet] a text file itself is not more readable 10:39 <+bridge_> [ddnet] you need a graphic unit to make it readable 10:39 <+bridge_> [ddnet] vim also reads the file somehow 10:39 <+bridge_> [ddnet] not like its just there 10:39 <+bridge_> [ddnet] The text file, without any processing beyond decoding is completely human readable 10:39 <+bridge_> [ddnet] a binary too, just in a hex editor 10:40 <+bridge_> [ddnet] chillerdragon i think u need virtual 10:40 <+bridge_> [ddnet] https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/dynamic_cast 10:41 <+bridge_> [ddnet] A binary file, especially the kind you'd consider since you want better performance, would not necessarily be human readable at all 10:41 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Even in a hex editor 10:41 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Numbers would probably all be in little endian 10:42 <+bridge_> [ddnet] why tho, binary files are also read somehow 10:42 <+bridge_> [ddnet] so you just need to know about that structure that reads it 10:42 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Don't need field names either since the structure is predetermined 10:42 <+bridge_> [ddnet] many hex editors even allow making structs to automatically parse it 10:43 <+bridge_> [ddnet] but now that you say it, a light compression could make sense too 10:43 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Text editors literally perform a single decoding operation. You are telling me hex editors have advanced features 10:43 <+bridge_> [ddnet] will add it to my never starting todo list 10:44 <+bridge_> [ddnet] No, don't be silly. You want everything uncompressed and everything in ram 10:44 <+bridge_> [ddnet] bcs text is also saved as binary in the end xD 10:44 <+bridge_> [ddnet] so whats the point 10:44 <+bridge_> [ddnet] yeah, but the SSD might be slower than the uncompressing 10:44 <+bridge_> [ddnet] need benchmarks to confirm 10:44 <+bridge_> [ddnet] in RAM it can be uncompressed ofc 10:44 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i have the 32gb ram 10:44 <+bridge_> [ddnet] No, trade boot performance with runtime performance 10:45 <+bridge_> [ddnet] ah btw, binary configs need less RAM xd 10:45 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Get more ram and at boot put everything in there 10:45 <+bridge_> [ddnet] yes 10:45 <+bridge_> [ddnet] run the whole database in ram 10:45 <+bridge_> [ddnet] SAP 10:45 <+bridge_> [ddnet] ditch hard disks 10:45 <+bridge_> [ddnet] embrace ram 10:45 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i dunno the sweatspot at this point, so cannot say what i'd trade 10:46 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Not necessarily, you can read it in chunks and just shove it inside the struct, so not even at read-time it doesn't necessarily need more ram 10:46 <+bridge_> [ddnet] but text is rather large on disk 10:46 <+bridge_> [ddnet] yeah but that defs makes it slower xD 10:46 <+bridge_> [ddnet] performance everything, even for that useless tool xDD (jk) 10:47 <+bridge_> [ddnet] Not really, buffered readers read at optimal-ish chunk sizes 10:47 <+bridge_> [ddnet] anyway, i just want new stuff, new ideas, 1 trillion FPS, instant loading times 10:47 <+bridge_> [ddnet] then i can die in peace 10:48 <+bridge_> [ddnet] I want new stuff, 200~ fps, reasonable loading times 10:49 <+bridge_> [ddnet] but can you then die in peace? xD 10:49 <+bridge_> [ddnet] I wonder if you can run ram in raid0 10:49 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i want unlimited fps 10:49 <+bridge_> [ddnet] im sure someday we will reach a point where talking about fps is meaningless 10:49 <+bridge_> [ddnet] dont be arrogant 10:49 <+bridge_> [ddnet] xd 10:49 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i doubt that tbh 10:49 <+bridge_> [ddnet] i dont 10:50 <+bridge_> [ddnet] if you want smth like sword art online 10:50 <+bridge_> [ddnet] No I will never be in peace, neither will you. We'll only get shitty old ideas because of licensing agreements, 60 fps because everything is optimized for console, meh loading times 10:50 <+bridge_> [ddnet] it has to be on pair with real world 10:50 <+bridge_> [ddnet] if moores law keeps appliying 10:50 <+bridge_> [ddnet] true :c 10:50 <+bridge_> [ddnet] the 60fps lock due to consoles 10:50 <+bridge_> [ddnet] is the worst nightmare 10:50 <+bridge_> [ddnet] waiting for elden ring mod to unlock fps 10:51 <+bridge_> [ddnet] but then u cant enjoy multiplayer 10:51 <+bridge_> [ddnet] cuz stupid anticheat 10:51 <+bridge_> [ddnet] It's so annoying for high refresh rate monitor people 10:51 <+bridge_> [ddnet] the problem is really that we probs about to hit the limit of transitor sizes in the next years 10:52 <+bridge_> [ddnet] then we can still optimize the offset between them and other hardware components 10:52 <+bridge_> [ddnet] but i guess in like 20 years we need a completly new idea 10:52 <+bridge_> [ddnet] @Not Keks what about making the cpu itself bigger 10:52 <+bridge_> [ddnet] https://inshorts.com/en/news/worlds-largest-processor-with-12-trillion-transistors-unveiled-1566360034551 10:52 <+bridge_> [ddnet] so you want a planet to simulate a virtual world (a planet) ? 😄 10:52 <+bridge_> [ddnet] yes! 10:52 <+bridge_> [ddnet]