NSRCG - 4th Edition ?, Looking for programmers |
NSRCG - 4th Edition ?, Looking for programmers |
Aug 24 2005, 03:30 PM
Post
#26
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 398 Joined: 25-August 04 From: Denver, CO Member No.: 6,599 |
i thought that the Python project that is currently under way was going to be a char. gen. for the Mac...am i missing something? i probably am since i was under the impression that Python was only for the Mac (maybe Unix) - is it, or does it run on Windows too?
anyway crystal, i say that if you want to write your own char. gen., or any other SR program, then go ahead...people will use what they like best and, even if no one else uses yours, you'll at least use it...right? also, in answer to your other question: i am currently planning to begin work on an SR4 char. gen. (why not...seems everyone else is :). i have been working on a package of SR3 programs for about 8 months now. it started when i found the NSRCG. i think that it's somewhat difficult to navigate and the .dat files cumbersome to edit *turns to start running from the gunfire* and i felt that i could do better (an admitidly unfounded opinion). i consider myself a novice programmer mind you and i am in no way dismissing what mcmackie has done thus far. i just feel that the learning curve on using the NSRCG is high and that the NSRCG includes too much clutter (like becks and sum to 10) - thought note that these are only clutter to me, and therefor is only my opinion. *begins to expect no one to use his apps based on his opinion of the extrainious char. gen. systems* however, these are only secondary and tertiary reasons for me going ahead with this project...the main reason is that i feel there are a lot of good programs out there - just none that work in conjunction with each other. my goal is to release a package of programs that all work together. and then, as demand dictates, i can release addon-programs (if i don't include a vehicle generator right away, then i can add one later and the vehicles it creates can be imported directly onto your character's sheet, etc.) i should be ready to release this set of programs by the end of the year...and as soon as i get my copy of SR4, i'm going to begin revising this suite to suit SR4. side notes: i do like that each character comes out of the NSRCG as a .sr3 file - so far mine's not that savvy. also, i think that shadowghost's programs look amazing and i'm going to leave the Mac world to him. *begins to miss his iBook* |
|
|
Aug 24 2005, 03:33 PM
Post
#27
|
|
Running, running, running Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,220 Joined: 18-October 04 From: North Carolina Member No.: 6,769 |
no python, AFAIK, is an OS independant program, although that brings up an interesting point 5that i think was made in regards to my flash program
(in that you need the flash pleyer for it) don't you also need to download the python stuff as well? the only program i have that uses python (openRPG) requires a pair of python programs to be installed as well. |
|
|
Aug 24 2005, 03:38 PM
Post
#28
|
|
Technomancer Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,638 Joined: 2-October 02 From: Champaign, IL Member No.: 3,374 |
As I understand it, Kagetenshi, our python guy, knows of a way to bundle things up so that there's just one .exe to download in order to make the character generator work. He'll probably have more informaiton when he finds this post ;)
|
|
|
Aug 24 2005, 03:41 PM
Post
#29
|
|||||||
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Completely cross-platform. Windows is the only major OS that doesn't ship with Python preinstalled, but see the end of this post for why that doesn't matter.
No gunfire, I agree completely. I respect the work that McMackie put in, but I don't think the NSRCG is a good program.
That's because, as far as I can tell, OpenRPG was programmed by baboons. There are a number of ways to embed an interpreter in a Python program, obviating the need for a separate download. ~J |
||||||
|
|||||||
Aug 24 2005, 03:57 PM
Post
#30
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 398 Joined: 25-August 04 From: Denver, CO Member No.: 6,599 |
*slightly off topic*
hey Kagetenshi - were you at gen-con this year? just trying to figure out if we've met and i didn't know all this time that you were huge into decking. |
|
|
Aug 24 2005, 04:05 PM
Post
#31
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Sadly I was not. I'd originally intended to go, but a few things came up that I needed to be around here for.
~J |
|
|
Aug 24 2005, 04:11 PM
Post
#32
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 398 Joined: 25-August 04 From: Denver, CO Member No.: 6,599 |
well, i'd like to use this time to send out a feeler:
i'm using vb.net 2005 beta 2 (which uses .net 2.0 - which no one has) and i'm waiting for the full version to come out (maybe it's out...i haven't kept up) so that i can 'bootstrap' .net 2.0 onto the program...my question is: do you think i should buy vb.net 2005 for the install wizard feature and the bootstrap feature, or do you think people would be willing to go and dowload .net 2.0 on their own and then download my stuff and try to save it in the right place on their machine? the point of why i'm doing this to begin with is to make it as user-friendly as possible...but visual studio stuff is expensive! |
|
|
Aug 24 2005, 04:21 PM
Post
#33
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 639 Joined: 22-April 02 Member No.: 2,638 |
How big is the .net d/l these days? 20-30mb? I doubt you'll get dial-up users (or even casual computer users) to go for that. You're probably better off with vb.net.
Oh, btw, prepare to be stoned by the anti-Wintel/Open-source brigade...;) |
|
|
Aug 24 2005, 04:23 PM
Post
#34
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
*Gathering rocks as we speak*
Seriously, if you already own it that's one thing, but I'd definitely suggest against buying it—something other than VB.net might be the better solution here. ~J |
|
|
Aug 24 2005, 04:50 PM
Post
#35
|
|||
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 398 Joined: 25-August 04 From: Denver, CO Member No.: 6,599 |
*ready for the stoning...expected it from the get-go* ya...but i've already written *tries to calcualte here* close to 8,000 lines in VB. and my windows are already all laid out and everything. is there an easy way to get all this to another language? (that i would then have to teach myself as i did .net) |
||
|
|||
Aug 24 2005, 04:54 PM
Post
#36
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Well, that changes things dramatically. I'd say that requiring your users to download something additional is undesirable, so the question comes down to the following: which of these three possibilities is the least distasteful to you?
1) Spending a fair amount of time rewriting the program in something else 2) Spending a fair amount of money buying VB.net 2005 3) Restricting your userbase to those willing to download a sizable extra component (keeping in mind that it's already restricted to Windows users and that there will be generator competition this time around) ~J |
|
|
Aug 24 2005, 08:33 PM
Post
#37
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 398 Joined: 25-August 04 From: Denver, CO Member No.: 6,599 |
well, i'm not rewriting it now...that would suck.
though i'm curious...if you write a program in something like Python or Java, will it work on Mac and Win? or do you write it for one and then it's easily ported to the other? |
|
|
Aug 24 2005, 09:02 PM
Post
#38
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
It works on both. It has a separate interpreter which is already written for both platforms.
~J |
|
|
Aug 25 2005, 06:55 PM
Post
#39
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 239 Joined: 10-February 04 Member No.: 6,068 |
archimagus,
I disagree with the others here. Though vb.net of any version is not what I would choose to write this in, I doubt that a download of 20-30mb one time is going to disuade the vast majority of poeple who would use this. People here tend to cry for the dial-up users, but I think that is an increasingly smaller portion of your audience. You already have much code written, and if they want to use something that you've spent your valuable time developing, they have to spend the one-time pain of a large, but reasonable download. If they think it's too big, then they don't have to use your program. The others are, of course, entitled to their opinions. I would rather have a released version of something that works and have a big download, than to have to wait another 6 months for you to convert to another language. If you want to be the real hero, then release it quickly however you like and make the source code available for other people to convert it to whatever they like on their own time. Kudos for you for making the time and writing something to help us all. |
|
|
Aug 25 2005, 06:58 PM
Post
#40
|
|||
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 398 Joined: 25-August 04 From: Denver, CO Member No.: 6,599 |
um...thanks! i just hope people like it...use it or not. this begs a good question - has anyone ever polled the members of dumpshock to see how many are dial-up and how many are faster than? |
||
|
|||
Aug 25 2005, 11:31 PM
Post
#41
|
|||
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 530 Joined: 11-June 05 Member No.: 7,441 |
See if it's possible to go from the .NET CLI to assembly. It should be able to target Visual Basic.NET at the .NET CLI, and it is technically possible to go from the .NET CLI to assembly (although I don't know if the tools exist for it). One of the big reasons .NET is a good thing is that they're targetting *many* different programming languages at the CLI, and you should be able to take the VB.NET functions and use them from say, C++ or C#, etc. You can write different parts of the program in different languages, target the compile to CLI, and if you can compile the CLI bitcode to proper native assembly, your users should not need to d/l .net |
||
|
|||
Aug 26 2005, 03:40 AM
Post
#42
|
|||||
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 398 Joined: 25-August 04 From: Denver, CO Member No.: 6,599 |
woosh...yep, that's the sound...woosh. that's what i heard when all those words went flying over my head :rotate: thanks for the help though...not your fault i didn't understand it. hey thanks Ecclesiastes for setting up that dial-up vs. broadband thread! |
||||
|
|||||
Aug 26 2005, 11:56 AM
Post
#43
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 530 Joined: 11-June 05 Member No.: 7,441 |
Basically, .NET is (among other things) a common executable and library format. You can compile programs in languages that are .NET compatible into this common format, and then use the functions, objects, procedures, whatever, in those programs from any other .NET programming language. In other words, there's nothing to prevent you from reusing the code you've developed in VB.NET in languages such as C++.NET, C#.NET, etc. ie, if you want to switch to these other languages, you don't have to rewrite what you've written just because you switched the language.
One of the target formats for the .NET executables is the CLI, which (according to my limited and potentially flawed understanding -- check it yourself) is apparently something like the Java bitcode. It's compiled to a binary code that is then interpreted (and sometimes just-in-time compiled) by the .NET runtime in order to run the program. It's theoretically possible to take this binary code (the CLI) and actually compile it to native hardware binary in advance so the end user doesn't have to have the .NET runtime, but I don't know if they've developed the tools for it. |
|
|
Aug 26 2005, 01:57 PM
Post
#44
|
|||
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 398 Joined: 25-August 04 From: Denver, CO Member No.: 6,599 |
cool - thanks. i'll keep that in mind! |
||
|
|||
Aug 26 2005, 03:30 PM
Post
#45
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 398 Joined: 25-August 04 From: Denver, CO Member No.: 6,599 |
ok, i've done some googling and found that my knowlege level is really what's holding me back here. let me explain:
the reason i'm using 'vb.net 2005 express beta 2' to begin with is that it was free and it included a graphical 'window builder' (just like visual studio has had in the past). i can make the window 'canvas' the size i want and then fill it with stuff like drop-down menus and buttons by just draging them onto my window. i know nothing about the code that creates these items because that's all done for me - all i know is the code that lets me manipulate these objects once they're there. is there something like this for java? or do i just finish my program in vb.net and then convert everything to java at that time? and will my windows and buttons and things go along for the conversion? i've found some converters online, but they all seem to work with VB6 and eariler...is it even possible to convert such a new environment to java? i don't expect anyone to actually have answers to these questions...i just wanted to pose them to see what i get back. thanks - i appreciate the help so far...there's no reason for you to do it. |
|
|
Aug 26 2005, 04:25 PM
Post
#46
|
|||
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 639 Joined: 22-April 02 Member No.: 2,638 |
Check out the Eclipse IDE. It's powerful, popular, and above all, FREE. [EDIT] Google for 'java' and 'ide', and you'll find quite a few good (free) IDEs. Netbeans is also quite popular (not surprisingly, since Sun bundles it with the SDK download). |
||
|
|||
Aug 26 2005, 04:59 PM
Post
#47
|
|||||
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 398 Joined: 25-August 04 From: Denver, CO Member No.: 6,599 |
thanks...i'll download it when i get back from lunch (i would do it during, but i take my laptop with me to code for that hour) darn java - sdk, jdk, sun, ide.....argh! |
||||
|
|||||
Aug 26 2005, 06:01 PM
Post
#48
|
|||
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 639 Joined: 22-April 02 Member No.: 2,638 |
Don't get too flustered by the TLAs (Three-Letter Acronyms)... SDK = Software Development Kit. Each language has its own SDK. The SDK typically includes a source code compiler as well as a library of helper functions that you can import into your application. SDKs for interpreted languages (such as Python and Java) typically also include a copy of the runtime interpreter and function libraries. JDK = Java Development Kit. A Java-specific SDK. Sun = the company that develops and owns the Java language. IDE = Integrated Development Environment. Basically, a GUI (Graphical User Interface) interface to the SDK. Typically includes a forms/window designing application and language syntax highlighter/editor. So basically, if you bought a copy of VB.net, then you bought the Microsoft Visual Basic SDK and IDE. If you downloaded NetBeans, then you downloaded the Sun Java SDK and IDE. Simple, no? |
||
|
|||
Aug 26 2005, 07:02 PM
Post
#49
|
|||||
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 398 Joined: 25-August 04 From: Denver, CO Member No.: 6,599 |
yes, simple - thanks! (i love learning computer stuff) oh, and i knew what sun was at least...i just wanted my list to be longer for a funnier effect :P |
||||
|
|||||
Aug 26 2005, 07:26 PM
Post
#50
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 398 Joined: 25-August 04 From: Denver, CO Member No.: 6,599 |
i would like to take this opportunity to apologize to crystal for high-jacking her thread...i only just realized what i've done and i would like to reiterate that i started this thing 6 months ago for the same reason as you - to learn a new language...and now i know vb.net and a lot of XML.
trying your hand at something like this is a great idea and i do not want to be the one to stop you...no software developer out there stops creating new software just because someone else has a similar product, and you shouldn't either. have fun and let me know if you want your thread back! |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 23rd November 2024 - 02:06 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.