1.11 Patch Update, 18 Oct 05

[BBushe]

 

 

 

..maybe, but remenber the total lines of code in the game are counting all the other files apart from the EXE suchs as DLL's graphics interphace and even 3D model action. The LOMAC EXE is slighly less than 4 MB,certainly much less than million lines of code, and I think most bugs come from it. Just check the size of each LOMAC EXE version. All Dll's are pretty small and each does a specialized task judging by their names.

 

 

LOL, so they only have to work on the code in the .exe! <smacks head> suddenly it's so obvious! They must be incredibly poor programmers after all! They can't even debug a 4MB .exe! which by your reckoning is only 8,000 lines of code! they've been doing it for months too, when as you say it should only take 160 man-hours (less than a week for a four man team!) to re-write it from scratch!

 

Do I sound unreasonable? Because the above sentance is what you seem to be saying.

[GGTharos]

I've written fairely small programs that quickly got out of control - if a program is complex enough, a flow chart won't help.

 

I'm certainly familiar with LARGER programs and how easily a change in one seemingly unrelated part will cascade down to cause problems elsewhere.

 

It has little to do with global variables or messy code or anything of the sort.

 

It has everything to do with the develoment compromise:

 

You can have two of: low cost, development speed, quality, but not all three.

 

Commercial products tend to sacrifice quality - it's a reality, wether you like it or not. You'll never see bugs in a sattelite control program for example, but then again, that program doesn't tend to tie into unknown DLLs, require extranneous code for handling who-knows-what, and the customer knows that if he rushes development, the sattelite will be wasted - and that's expensive. That kind of development is very expensive and very slow, too - you'll get done in one month what you'd 'normally' get done in one day (and that's a quote from someone who has done such work). That sort of Quality COSTS. It costs big bucks and big time.

 

So don't go around accusing ED of writing messy software if you haven't participated in the coding of a large project and don't understand the difficulties behind it.

[Guest ThomasDWeiss]

So don't go around accusing ED of writing messy software if you haven't participated in the coding of a large project and don't understand the difficulties behind it.

 

I know for a fact, that if you know how to open LockOn.exe you will find in it the 1979 Playmate of the year centerfold JPG.

[BBushe]

I know for a fact, that if you know how to open LockOn.exe you will find in it the 1979 Playmate of the year centerfold JPG.

 

lmao

[Maulkin]

I know for a fact, that if you know how to open LockOn.exe you will find in it the 1979 Playmate of the year centerfold JPG.

 

I think that only works if you hold down the F1 and F9 keys simultaneously while tapping the 'C' key six times in one second intervals. ;)

 

BTW, physical size of a program is no indicator of complexity.

[tflash]

Pilotasso, you might want to read more about code metrics for software complexity, like cyclomatic complexity. You will soon notice that things are more ... complex then you might think!

[Vosxod]

Ohhh, where do I start... Just looking at this remark:

You will ALWAYS have global variables. Thing is you should use these to join up the subprograms together not managing what each suprogram does inside.

any professional could tell that you obviosly dont know much about software development. You know those movies like 'hackers' or 'swordfish'? You know how they are far from reality? :) I feel same way when read your comments:

...I think its not quite a complexity problem that dictates "messy programming"

Might be time deadlines, team funding and organization. I remenber a long time ago a professional software designer walked on these forums and stated that game programers usualy didnt have advanced degrees on software...

Where did you get am impression that there is such university, degree or whatever that makes someone a good programmer? I bet you that top programmers in the worrld, the elite, had never attended any stupid lectures like 'basics of java'!

Believe me you dont know what means to work on complex software project. There is lot's of stuff involved including art. And art, my friend, you cannot struturize and parametrize. So lets just leave for developers do development...

[Pilotasso]

Im currently modeling an unconventional suspension system in calculus sheets. I have spread the calculations through intervals of time (tables with large columns of 1000 rows) and I have made a timer in visual basic to include tens of seconds so that when the counter runs, the whole table is swept and draws a graph with all coordinates of the mechanism components for each timed instantaneous moment. It does the sweep in real time giving the illusion of motion in the graph.

 

I have learned that when one starts to develop a complex simulator (because what I ended up with in excell IS a real time suspension simulator) the partners in the project seased to be able to keep up, not because they cant, but rather because it became too big to explain it all in such short deadline.

 

I have to deliver the project ealy next year and I simply dont have the time to coordinate wich part of the simulator each one of us is going to do because I have an Idea, then I have to transmit it to the others, then I have to wait them to finish their part, something for wich I already have Ideas how it must be donne.

 

So I have split the team into 3 components. I will do the simulator, another will take care of the details of construction and the other validates the theorical model.

I ask the construction detail guy wich dampers I have at disposal, he gives me data, then I give him the prediction of my model and the 3rd guy in the end says if the results I given are verifyed in experiments.

 

All this is going probably result in a doggy car we must construct.

 

This is what a small team can do. I already expressed my concerns about if problems arise, it will be almost impossible to go back and correct it in time.

 

Idealy I should have 4 guys under me to program the calculus sheet, at least 2 more guys verifying results in commercial scientific programs and 4 others building the thing. Preferrably with experience in home brew cart cross cars (wich is what suposed to be since we cant do anything bigger due to lack of funds)

 

can you see the analogy between this and LOMAC?

 

edit: I seem to be unable to post pics ever since this forum got renewed, they obey the size limit confortably, what gives?

[GGTharos]

Now you're making sense. So what's your argument again? ;)

[Pilotasso]

LOL, so they only have to work on the code in the .exe! <smacks head> suddenly it's so obvious! They must be incredibly poor programmers after all! They can't even debug a 4MB .exe! which by your reckoning is only 8,000 lines of code! they've been doing it for months too, when as you say it should only take 160 man-hours (less than a week for a four man team!) to re-write it from scratch!

 

Do I sound unreasonable? Because the above sentance is what you seem to be saying.

 

Nope what wanted to say is, if one could get a systmatic way of compartimentalyze each aspect of the sim into seperate components it would be much easier to work the bugs out, I have established a linear way of thinking between my individual work and LOMAC to try to show if ED somehow could organize the team to adopt this methodology they wouldnt have to paste everything in a meat ball.

Of course they cant, or think its too risky to contract debts untill the end product pays it all, because they might feel they need to pay for alot more employees to beggin with.

 

There must be a way.

Im curious on how proffessional military SIM's do it smoother and cleaner. Is it just the money? Judging by some experienced folks here its rather the nature of the project, but then again this brings me back to the earlier question...

 

 

Bear in mind that the notion I have about this discussion is like a brainstorm. A frindly debate were all kinds of ideas are exposed and are not necessarily symptomatic of conflicting personal positions.

[bflagg]

I think that only works if you hold down the F1 and F9 keys simultaneously while tapping the 'C' key six times in one second intervals. ;)

 

BTW, physical size of a program is no indicator of complexity.

 

You a XP programmer?

That will pull up help and support...

 

wow a windows keystroke i didn't know...

 

thanks.. my life is now complete :)

[Pilotasso]

Ohhh, where do I start... Just looking at this remark:

 

any professional could tell that you obviosly dont know much about software development. You know those movies like 'hackers' or 'swordfish'? You know how they are far from reality? :)

 

I never seen any of those hacker movies you mentioned: regretfully I dont have cable and the generalist chanels have only movies for wider audience (cheaper ones to air too) and I never rent any DVD's my family doesnt like to watch too (sharing expenses). Its the economical crysis.:biggrin:

 

The closent thing to this I ever saw was "the matrix" or perhaps "Jonhy mneumonic" (aargh my spelling) curiously also starring Keanu Reeves.

 

 

 

Ohhh, where do I start... Just looking at this remark:

 

I feel same way when read your comments:

Where did you get am impression that there is such university, degree or whatever that makes someone a good programmer? I bet you that top programmers in the worrld, the elite, had never attended any stupid lectures like 'basics of java'!

you bet?:rolleyes:

I think the best way to see if your bet is won is to ask a major sofware developer. If you know someone intimate with windows coding it would be gr8! Im not joking...

 

 

Believe me you dont know what means to work on complex software project. There is lot's of stuff involved including art. And art, my friend, you cannot struturize and parametrize. So lets just leave for developers do development...

 

Art?! what they are debugging sure aint the bits or the 0's and 1's in the texture files!

[SwingKid]

Do you mean that something like a dynamic campaign engine could run between missions, independently of the main program, and be more efficiently produced with fewer bugs?

 

Interesting dream... :(

 

-SK

[BuzzU]

Good news of the patch seems to be lost in this thread somewhere.

[Attila]

Pilotasso wrote: Nope what wanted to say is, if one could get a systmatic way of compartimentalyze each aspect of the sim into seperate components it would be much easier to work the bugs out, I have established a linear way of thinking between my individual work and LOMAC to try to show if ED somehow could organize the team to adopt this methodology they wouldnt have to paste everything in a meat ball.

 

Maybe ED should try this: :icon_wink

 

http://www.eagle.ru/manage_eng.htm

[Vati]

hehe Attila, you had just posted what I had in mind to do... :D

[Pilotasso]

Do you mean that something like a dynamic campaign engine could run between missions, independently of the main program, and be more efficiently produced with fewer bugs?

 

Interesting dream... :(

 

-SK

 

LOMAC as you know doesnt have a dynamic campaign, but now that you mention it...yes its a good Idea. You could have diferent files modules 1 for the 3D simulation and the other for the strategical plot on the map. LOMAC was never meant to be structured like this so obviously Im not asking the team to "adapt" the game overnight.

 

 

The 3D sim would idealy have a few variables just to comunitcate to the strategy module about what has changed in the scenario, the strategical module would pick that information up and run its own data, and comunicate back to the 3D SIM all the mission data.

 

So if you need to establish how a platoon moves on the map (to correct eventual bugs such as men walking on water) you wouldnt mess up missile behaviour or something like that.

 

There are a number of games that run like that. I recently am playing master of orion 3 (oldie) and it runs batlles either in interective 3D or in the background, results of course vary from 1 to the other because they are calculated differently. I dunno if F4 does the same or if the developers just pasted all the code in a single mess. Likely it was, because it was plagued by bugs wich were very slowly dealt with, even when it was anounced wich instructions were responsible for it, something else always broke during the fix. The team was small and the game was rushed to release too soon by their bosses. Not saying it was the same case as LOMAC but the limitations in man power and time were once again limiting factors for the code efficiency.

[sumoscouse]

Wags Update on Patch 1.11 (V 8)

 

RIGHTIO THEN MMmmmmm :confused:

 

Lovely to hear about the progress with the FC Patch.......and nice to see sooo many replies about this HOWEVER

 

After page 4 I BECAME CONFUSED AND THOUGHT THAT SOMEHOW I HAD BEEN ZAPPED ONTO ANOTHER FORUM INFESTED WITH PROGRAMMERS

 

.........so i just thought it would be a good idea to stop reading COZ MY BRAIN WAS SUFFERING FROM AN UNUSUAL PAIN that i have never experienced b4

 

:cool:

 

 

SumoScouse out

 

 

Medic :icon_excl

[gustav]

No need to hurry. June is still a long way off...

[Pilotasso]

RIGHTIO THEN MMmmmmm :confused:

 

Lovely to hear about the progress with the FC Patch.......and nice to see sooo many replies about this HOWEVER

 

After page 4 I BECAME CONFUSED AND THOUGHT THAT SOMEHOW I HAD BEEN ZAPPED ONTO ANOTHER FORUM INFESTED WITH PROGRAMMERS

 

.........so i just thought it would be a good idea to stop reading COZ MY BRAIN WAS SUFFERING FROM AN UNUSUAL PAIN that i have never experienced b4

 

:cool:

 

 

 

 

SumoScouse out

 

 

Medic :icon_excl

 

your brain just hit a bad sector?:rolleyes: :biggrin:

[Doug97]

Ohhh, where do I start... Just looking at this remark:

 

any professional could tell that you obviosly dont know much about software development. You know those movies like 'hackers' or 'swordfish'? You know how they are far from reality? :) I feel same way when read your comments:

 

What?! So programmers never 'jack in to the mainframe' or route everything through 3 satellites so that they're impossible to track? I feel cheated ...

[Gazehound]

LOMAC as you know doesnt have a dynamic campaign, but now that you mention it...yes its a good Idea.

 

If anyone has come close to providing a community Dynamic Campaign it is SK....But the features are not in the game to allow it (mainly exports I believe).

A ED version is not planned unfortunately.

[BBushe]

What?! So programmers never 'jack in to the mainframe' or route everything through 3 satellites so that they're impossible to track? I feel cheated ...

 

And they don't break 512 bit encrytion in 39 secs while Halle Berry is giving them a BJ, just by trusting their intuition?

 

But seriously, Pilotasso, what people are trying to say is: Eagle Dynamics ARE professional programmers, they DO have professional standards, they do 'compartmentalise' their work, they do use subroutines (and they will all be far more elegantly coded than you and I can do), and they co-ordinate many coders in a complex simulation. I work with 'professional' software costing 5 figures and more, and it all has as many bugs and patches, and as far as I can see, most of them do not achieve as much as LOMAC does.

[tflash]

Is this thread heading nowhere or has it been there already? Pilotasso, fine for you that you decide to give it a go on clean programming.

 

In the meantime, we, lockon enthousiasts, are just waiting for some news on the patch. I guess you should enlist in one of the many forums on programming styles while we further discuss Lockon. Bye.

[Doug97]

And they don't break 512 bit encrytion in 39 secs while Halle Berry is giving them a BJ, just by trusting their intuition?

 

Yes, I felt that was also very unrealistic. If Halle Berry was giving ME a BJ, I'd be lucky if I could write my name in crayon.