magnetic

I think that those who criticize chatGPT or AI associated with coding and programming, and I'm not talking about other capabilities, don't understand the current and future technical leap. Have fun asking him for examples

Here's my wish! An even more optimized and modern DCS core, ChaGPT tell me: Would Eagle Dynamics consider rewriting all or part of DCS in Rust? Currently, Eagle Dynamics (ED) has not announced any plans to rewrite its DCS (Digital Combat Simulator) codebase in Rust, but the idea raises an interesting discussion. Why Rust could benefit DCS: Improved Memory Safety: Rust eliminates common vulnerabilities like memory leaks or buffer overflows, which are common in C++. For a complex simulator like DCS, this could enhance stability and reduce debugging overhead. Better Multithreading Support: Rust offers modern concurrency primitives and enforces thread safety at compile time. For DCS, where computational tasks like physics, AI, and rendering heavily rely on multithreading, Rust could help achieve better performance. Future-proofing: Rust is increasingly adopted by major tech companies like Microsoft and Google for its combination of performance and safety, making it a strategic option for modernizing older C++ codebases. Challenges of adopting Rust for DCS: Legacy Codebase: The DCS engine has decades of development history in C++. Migrating to Rust would involve a significant effort in rewriting, testing, and validating functionality. Resource Intensive: Rewriting even parts of the engine in Rust would require time, resources, and specialized Rust expertise, which may not align with ED's current priorities. Development Delay: Transitioning to a new language could slow down the development of new features and modules—a risk that might not sit well with the DCS community. Conclusion: While Rust offers significant long-term advantages, such a transition would likely be a gradual and selective process, if at all. Eagle Dynamics' focus remains on iterating and improving the existing engine rather than embarking on a costly rewrite. How Could AI Accelerate the Transition of DCS to Rust? You’re correct in noting that the rise of AI tools has significantly reduced barriers to migrating code between languages, making such a transition more viable than ever. AI-Powered Migration: Automatic Translation Tools: AI tools like Codex or specialized transpilers (e.g., c2rust) can assist in converting large portions of C++ code to Rust, while flagging areas that need manual adjustment or optimization. Automated Optimization: AI can not only translate code but also refactor it to adhere to Rust’s best practices (e.g., improving thread safety or using idiomatic constructs like Rust’s ownership model). Testing Automation: AI can generate comprehensive unit tests and integration tests to validate that Rust code functions identically to the original C++ version, ensuring smoother transitions without regressions. AI's Role in Game Development: Redefining Developers’ Roles: As the NVIDIA CEO suggested, AI is shifting programmers’ focus from writing code to overseeing, curating, and validating AI-generated solutions. Strategic Advantage for Studios: Studios like Eagle Dynamics could harness AI to modernize their architecture while continuing to release updates and new modules. AI assistance would reduce the bottleneck associated with refactoring large, legacy codebases. Industry Adoption: Although Rust is gaining traction, especially for system-level programming, adopting it fully for a complex simulation like DCS requires time and careful integration into the current workflow. Conclusion: While AI would undoubtedly accelerate any migration effort, the key challenges remain the sheer size of the DCS codebase, its high complexity, and the need for ongoing feature development. If ED were to adopt Rust, AI would likely serve as an indispensable tool for selectively modernizing critical parts of the engine. This perspective combines both the promise of modern Rust programming with the evolving capabilities of AI to reshape the future of software engineering.

I see today a new work with better visual explosions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWd1m4okJl8

New explosions better I think , more realist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWd1m4okJl8

Hello, Thanks for reply, after verification no problem on my computer. I tested that and compare with mersh rockets: and the real sounds from real scud here :

Hello, I try scud B mod, thanks for all but I don't hear sound ? No sound ?

For the Tacan Mod , are there same soluce with Moose script API ? Here : https://flightcontrol-master.github.io/MOOSE_DOCS/Documentation/Core.Radio.html##(BEACON).New

I show you a too bright lights from AI planes (Othher too?) , I think this light is too bright in reality life not the same: Here DCS

Really Flagon is wonderfull machine ! I want too !

What this version ? What the official ? I have 1.6.1.0 https://github.com/ciribob/DCS-SimpleRadioStandalone Right or not ? Thanks

Eagle Dynamics planned separate sounds now or not ?

I think DCS can make realist explosions, now multicore can do that ! They can 2D or "sprite fake explosions" for far view and near can make with classic method

I would like same explosions :

DCS have a big problem with realism with smoke and explosions, maybe this effects will be settings for more or less realism, if the problem is stonger PC or lighter PC configuration. DCS 2.0 and directx11 give more realism for water ? Warthunder or arma 3 have a really good effect of the sea. I dont understand why DCS dont work better smoke, clouds or explosions; contrail ( VERY BAD EFFECT, better on F15c around winglet) Smoke more better on other sim or games, THESE EFFECTS ARE THE SOUL OF THE GOOD and IMMERSIVE SENSATION, WHEN I PILOT A PLANE INTO A SIM. IT'S IMPORTANT ! NOT FOR YOU ? The future Directx12 give more power for computation, staff of DCS have plan for use the best of DirectX 12 ?

Flight test with skin "Caucasian" from TDC (Tueurs de Chars) virtual pilot squad BUMBee magnetic

because into a simulation the smoke is very important for hide target, and some target become invisible after big explosion, in the simulation we can fire and forget all, and it seems so easy.

Here a good picture for heat blur http://www.flightchief.com/pictures/a-10/LiveFire/674G6532.jpg

I think smoke and explosions are very immersive inside war-game, and war sim. Maybe sending question at Nikolay Brezin ( Smoke effects and new model format support inside flight manual programmers list). •Why smoke and explosions are so poor ? •It' is true than DCS-A10 don't use all core inside processor ? •Why can not use illusion and false 3D effect for more smoke ? similar flat smoke seen by player ? •And heat blur don't good too, I compare with X-plane10 and the exhaust gas from reactor are more accurate with reality (need more long, I think) •Smoke from factory look like all equal, it's ugly. In real world, smoke are different size, and some don't smoke. •All this little effect give immersive or not immersive flight simulator.