Are we moving on a modes sim?

[TaliG]

Says Who?

 

Nate

 

I have not read the original LOMAC legal agreement, but all software usualy state this into their legal agreement.

 

And again:

Please correct me, I am just speculating here, enlighten me.

 

EDIT: There is also the possibility that my brain is becoming ''spageti''. If this is the case or not, we can always end the conversation.

Edited September 8, 2013 by TaliG

[Nate--IRL--]

AFAIK ED owns the code - UBISOFT own the name Lock On.

 

Nate

[Flagrum]

I never said I was against new features, that would be like dumping a modern fighter for a Sopwith Camel. I am against adding new tech missiles on a Sopwith Camel airframe though, if you know what I mean. And again I have no problem if you those high tech weapons on the old airframe ''correctly''.

 

 

 

This is EXACTLY what I am afraid will happen sooner or later.

 

 

Huge amounts of RAM needed (many people also think that is a memory leak), spontaneous pauses for no explainable reason (no graphics overload or enything), 1 minute just to close the game, those are some of the evidence that leads me to believe that ''spageti code'' is cooked in my system.

DCS has some technical problems, yes. But I think, these are primarily because of the current 3d engine and most of that will be solved with EDGE. Yeah, HOPEFULLY.

 

Memory leak? Yes, most likely issues that have to do that they use LUA. It is a different technology than the C++ code used in the rest of DCS, so there are interfaces and many spots where data has to be moved from/to the one or the other direction.

 

(Extremely) slow opening/closing of missions? Again: yes, most likely because LUA is involved. This time it is just the ammount of LUA code that has to be executed. Look into the DCS directory - the Bazar folder, the Database folder and at least one of the Mod sub-folders are loaded and run when starting a mission. The debriefing screen at the end of the mission and the whole GUI as such is also LUA. But during flight, there is only so much LUA involved as the mission designer had decided to put in.

 

Those extemely long loading times a few people here reported for 1.2.6 - I don't know, that can be everything. But I am pretty sure that this is not directly an evidence for spaghetti code.

 

LUA is slow and mixing technologies is always a bit problematic. But this is not a sign of spaghetti code but were design decisions made waaaay back then.

[RagnarDa]

Speculate all you want :D

[tintifaxl]

LUA is slow and mixing technologies is always a bit problematic.

 

Mixing languages with managed an unmanaged memory allocation is. You never know when that garbage collector interferes and your managed code just freezes.

[TaliG]

Mixing languages with managed an unmanaged memory allocation is. You never know when that garbage collector interferes and your managed code just freezes.

 

And this is all about code optimisation, we have little to none here im afraid.

[Supersheep]

It usually takes smart people with complete access to the code to get things sorted. How can we armchair gamers say how't is?

 

In the pub, everyone is the best soccer trainer xD

 

 

Super-

[TaliG]

It usually takes smart people with complete access to the code to get things sorted. How can we armchair gamers say how't is?

 

In the pub, everyone is the best soccer trainer xD

 

 

Super-

 

Directors makes movies, we are the critics.