I apologize greatly for posting in General, I'm a new user so I'm not allowed to post in Software and Ports.
GZDoom++'s main feature so far is the complete removal of telemetry (d_anonstats.cpp) from the code.
Currently, I only plan to support Unix, although the fork is so basic right now that it can probably run on Windows and Mac.
I also plan to use GZDoom++ as a ground for esoteric features that would never be accepted into GZDoom.
I have one problem, however; I've ran out of ideas. I have no idea what to do next, which is why I'm making this thread.
Does anyone have any ideas to add to this new-fangled source port I've created?
https://github.com/libremafia/gzdoomplusplus
Announcing GZDoom++, a fork of GZDoom for Unix users!
-
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2018 10:16 am
-
- Posts: 21706
- Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 7:33 pm
- Preferred Pronouns: He/Him
- Operating System Version (Optional): A lot of them
- Graphics Processor: Not Listed
Re: Announcing GZDoom++, a fork of GZDoom for Unix users!
I've moved the thread to where it belongs.libremafia wrote:I apologize greatly for posting in General, I'm a new user so I'm not allowed to post in Software and Ports.
...On a different note, though, why post anything if all you've done is remove a feature that is 100% clear about what it does and can be easily opted out of?
-
-
- Posts: 17934
- Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:22 pm
Re: Announcing GZDoom++, a fork of GZDoom for Unix users!
So the main feature is the removal of inactive code, and you don't know what to do next? Okay.
-
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2018 10:16 am
Re: Announcing GZDoom++, a fork of GZDoom for Unix users!
wildweasel wrote:I've moved the thread to where it belongs.libremafia wrote:I apologize greatly for posting in General, I'm a new user so I'm not allowed to post in Software and Ports.
...On a different note, though, why post anything if all you've done is remove a feature that is 100% clear about what it does and can be easily opted out of?
I did this mainly to learn how to code in C++. I'm sorry if this project is stupid, I'd rather have the feature completely removed from the code itself.Gez wrote:So the main feature is the removal of inactive code, and you don't know what to do next? Okay.