Linux progress

adx · Post by **adx** » Fri May 28, 2004 1:03 am

charris wrote: I have heard it the other way around. A lot of people that use Windows and have never used Linux thinks it's crap. I try not to hate something i've never tried before. Hense i'm going to buy an XBox 2.

Yup, there are too many people out there saying that this thing sucks even though they haven't even tried it, those are die hard fanboys. They tell those things because they are stuck with those stuffs and couldn't switch to the other. MOstly, they're the ones who are afraid of change, victims of dogmatism.

charris wrote: But some people switched to Linux because of really bad experiances with Windows (like me!) which may be why we dislike windows. Or maybe because MS doesn't like to distribute source, therefore hating everything MS puts out.

I still use windows but I'm now studying Linux(I'm in a dual boot). Linux is a good OS specially for programmers who want to learn more things than just stick with an OS with everything done for you and doesn't even share some of it's source code.

Post by **randi** » Fri May 28, 2004 3:36 pm

HotWax wrote:Yes and while you're at it, is there any way I could get my hands on a copy of the 2.0.64 Windows source?

I don't think you'd want it. Here's a preview of what you'd get if you tried compiling it right now:

QBasicer · Post by **QBasicer** » Fri May 28, 2004 4:24 pm

What about Linux?

Post by **Graf Zahl** » Fri May 28, 2004 4:32 pm

I doubt the error list will look much different there. Obviously Randy is in the process of massively rewriting parts of the code.

Post by **Xaser** » Sat May 29, 2004 7:46 am

Yeah. I was assuming that Randy must have been making a huge change in something if .64 is delayed this long. It seems I was right.

Post by **Graf Zahl** » Sat May 29, 2004 7:55 am

Xaser wrote:Yeah. I was assuming that Randy must have been making a huge change in something if .64 is delayed this long. It seems I was right.

This was easier to determine from the fact that no bugs are being fixed currently. For that there could have been only 2 reasons:

1. Randy has abandoned ZDoom (unlikely)
2. Some major changes are being done which prevent Randy from fixing bugs at the same time (more likely)

QBasicer · Post by **QBasicer** » Sat May 29, 2004 8:07 am

Look at the errors, you can almost tell what he is working on...

Post by **Graf Zahl** » Sat May 29, 2004 9:14 am

Sure, the new inventory system, as he already said. Currently he's rewriting the weapon handling.

Xenaero · Post by **Xenaero** » Sat Jun 05, 2004 4:19 pm

Randy, what compiler is that?

Chilvence · Post by **Chilvence** » Sat Jun 05, 2004 4:30 pm

Visual Studio .Net most likeley

BouncyTEM · Post by **BouncyTEM** » Sat Jun 05, 2004 6:27 pm

...with THAT many errors, i will patiently wait for .64 even longer! I don't want a broken version!

Chilvence · Post by **Chilvence** » Sun Jun 06, 2004 1:17 am

You can get that many errors just from a mispelling if you change the right bit

Post by **Graf Zahl** » Sun Jun 06, 2004 2:06 am

You can also get this many errors by removing 2 or 3 variables from the player structure!

Chilvence · Post by **Chilvence** » Sun Jun 06, 2004 6:20 am

Well, thats what happened here. But I also mean its very easy to get a comparable number of errors when the source has just one typo, so number of errors doesnt count

Xenaero · Post by **Xenaero** » Sun Jun 06, 2004 10:57 am

I know well enough from PHP coding that one missed ; in any file can cause heavily devastating effects.