Re: Image Not Appearing
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Dec 22, 2011
- 1772 views
In the interest of code that works
Are you saying my code doesn't work?
On this computer, it ran very slowly. It took 10 seconds to trace a diagonal line from (arbitrary coordinate system) (0,0) to (10,10).
That was a design compromise. A lower threshold was not possible without directly calling lower level OS functions (e.g. nanosleep()), busy-waiting, or depending on Euphoria 4.0 (as earlier versions busy-waited for fractional seconds).
In retrospect this was probably not the best design decision.
If one understand "works" as "demonstrating code without boring someone who is waiting on it to do something
I can not find this definition or understanding in a dictionary. Perhaps you could point me to a better authoritive reference.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/work?db=%252A
and making use of a screen bigger than a palmtop calculator", then your code didn't work for me. Indeed, you said "down to a corner of the screen" which did not happen unless i shrank the dosbox down to 1.2 inches square.
The small screen size was another design decision, for those of us who use really small console windows (less than 80x25 in size). Why? One reason is to enable as many users to try out the code as possible. Another reason is because this is what I use.
By changing the two values you specified, the trace went all over the dosbox and didn't ever simply retrace a short diagonal line. I also made it easier to figure out what was going on by using sleep() instead of a machine call, and i used a small sub-second sleep value to speed it up.
I believe that these are excellent enhancements which are a lot closer to the original intention of the OP. Your version is incredibly useful and helpful, probably more so than mine.
Naturally, there's plenty more one could do to the code to install more entertainment and/or education value.
I agree as well.
I did attempt to discuss this with you ~14 hours ago on irc.
eukat
I didn't see it. There is a likely explaination, however:
I am still placing the nick useless and its derivatives under ignore, to protest your decision to use that name, in the same way that unkmar is protesting this by refusing to join the IRC channel at all. I'm not protesting your right to use that name, or any other name, just the reasoning behind the choice: that you are unable to make useful contributions. I think your posts on this thread show that this belief is false.
