Author Topic: Discussion on development suites (Read 4251 times)

necro · « **on:** May 13, 2007, 02:05:00 pm »

Well, I was thinking that it would be nice to have a high quality tool to make a wide range of projects in a variety of languages, and be able to make projects in groups more easily. So, to do this, I wonder what kinds of features might be nice and get some of your ideas.

First, I think you would need to figure out the extent of the things you'd want to be able to do. I was thinking that among other things:
1. Develop 2D games for calcs and comp in a number of langauges
2. Develop sites
3. Develop 3D fuctions, engines, and games
4. Develop graphics
5. Develop sounds
6. Develop movies

second, As far as tools, I think
1. a tool to write and format docs as html pages, .docs, .txts, and so on as easy as word
2. a tool to manage spread sheets for things like calculating cost or analyzing data
3. a tool to make graphics and easily integrate them into other projects
4. a tool to inventory resources for a project
5. a tool to do 3D modeling for projects
6. a tool to help draft and rough out a concept for a project
7. a calender and scheduler to help keep track of progress
8. a system of sharing resources and projects online with other people
9. a series of programing tools, libraries and so on

I was wondering which of tose you care about, and then perhaps discuss specifications

bfr · « **Reply #1 on:** May 13, 2007, 04:17:00 pm »

This seems cool, but how wide of a range would it have (what programming languages would it support, what libraries would it support, etc.)? It seems like it could get unnecessarily huge and complex.

necro · « **Reply #2 on:** May 13, 2007, 05:12:00 pm »

Right now, not entirely sure which languages for. I was thinking it might be possible to make it have a standard format that seperate translators can be plugged into so it could easily be run through VB, C, etc. and be OS independent. Each translator would have its own set of libraries to do things, and unsupported calls would return errors. Basicaly a write once, more easily rewrite for something else sort of idea.

I am making a drawing program right now for instance, and a modeler (though its not coming nearly as well)

On a side note, I am trying to make a standard for printing in vb and its no picknick.

Halifax · « **Reply #3 on:** May 14, 2007, 09:09:00 am »

First off I would definetly help. I think though that you should make a universal language for the project or something called DevC so that people could use that and use a compiler you make. Overall I would code this project in C++. Also it might not be deathly to hard to make a 3D modelling program since you could use Blender3D source code as a core.

Here is what I am interested in by numbers.

1
2
3
4
5
6

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Haha so that's almost anything. So what are you coding this in so far?? If you need any help I will be here.

necro · « **Reply #4 on:** May 14, 2007, 06:41:00 pm »

As of right now, I will probably try to go towards c++ if I can find the resources I need, but java is realitivly easy to program for and cross compile and I am a lot more familar with it so I am not sure. I haven't realy figured out the extenet to which VB works but if it is more powerful than the the way the book is teaching, it might be conciderable to.

That said, I always program thing in GML first as I can use quite simplified resource management, fast debugging, etc. to get to a working code/proof of concept stage as it just makes life easier. Problem is, gml isn't that great for a number of tasks, and is not OS independent.

Jon · « **Reply #5 on:** May 14, 2007, 06:56:00 pm »

if you include calc progging in asm, include wabbitspasm!

necro · « **Reply #6 on:** May 15, 2007, 04:29:00 pm »

Ior any kind of calc assembling, I would probably perfer to include a list of different assembler options.

Halifax · « **Reply #7 on:** May 16, 2007, 12:00:00 pm »

First off, I would just make my own assembler. Because it is not that hard and there are some features SPASM is missing. Also C++ is cross compilable with MSYS. Its very simple.

bfr · « **Reply #8 on:** May 16, 2007, 12:25:00 pm »

I would use (wabbit)spasm. What features are missing? Tell them to Spencer at RevSoft.

Halifax · « **Reply #9 on:** May 16, 2007, 12:44:00 pm »

I rather just program them myself because really it would require a full rewrite of his macro system and some of the parser. So I don't really care its not a big deal now it just takes me 2 hours to work around and some things I can't even do which should be able to be done but they aren't "legal" macros by the "standards" set by TASM. Plus an assembler would be much more managable in C++.

Plus to add to my dismay I don't like at all how he coded his assembler. Try reading the source it is so nested that you will find you self jumping and hopping all around to finally find it like 1 year later

.

For example he has something like

do_assemble(PASS_1)
then do assemble has
pass1_assemble
and that has
parse_macros

stuff like that gets annoying especially when the source doesn't run linear

.