Search Results

Search found 9343 results on 374 pages for 'generation d systems'.

Page 1/374 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Procedural content (settlement) generation

    - by instancedName
    I have, lets say, something like a homework or assignment to do. Roughly said I need to write an algorithm (pseudo code is not necessary, just in depth description) of procedure that would generate settlements, environment and a people to populate it with, as part of some larger world generation procedure. The genre of game is not specified, it could be any genre (rpg, strategy, colony simulation etc.) where interacting with large and extensive world is central to the game. Procedure should be called once per settlement. At the time of calling, world generation procedure makes geography, culture and history input available. Output should be map of the village and it's immediate area, and various potential additional information like myths, history, demographic facts etc. Bonus would be quest ant similar stuff, but that not really my focus at the moment. I will leave quality of the output for later when I actually dig little deeper into this topic. I am free to change parameters as long as I have strong explanation for doing so. Setting of the game is undetermined so I am free to use anything that I like the most. Ok, so my actual question is: Can anyone who has some experience in this field of game design recommend me some good literature, or point me in the direction where I should look/reed/study? I'm somewhat experienced game programmer, but I've never been into game design till now so any help will be great. I want to do this assignment as good as I can. As for deadline, it's not strictly set, but lets say I don't want it to take longer then few weeks, one month at worst case.

    Read the article

  • Procedural landscape generation but not just fractals

    - by Richard Fabian
    In large procedural landscape games, the land seems dull, but that's probably because the real world is largely dull, with only limited places where the scenery is dramatic or tactical. Looking at world generation from this point of view, a landscape generator for a game needs to not follow the rules of landscaping, but instead some rules married to the expectations of the gamer. For example, there could be a choke point / route generator that creates hills ravines, rivers and mountains between cities, rather than cities plotted on the land based on the resources or conditions generated by the mountains and rainfall patterns. Is there any existing work being done like this? Start with cities or population centres and then add in terrain afterwards?

    Read the article

  • Procedural world generation oriented on gameplay features

    - by Richard Fabian
    In large procedural landscape games, the land seems dull, but that's probably because the real world is largely dull, with only limited places where the scenery is dramatic or tactical. Looking at world generation from this point of view, a landscape generator for a game needs to not follow the rules of landscaping, but instead some rules married to the expectations of the gamer. For example, there could be a choke point / route generator that creates hills ravines, rivers and mountains between cities, rather than cities plotted on the land based on the resources or conditions generated by the mountains and rainfall patterns. Is there any existing work being done like this? Start with cities or population centres and then add in terrain afterwards?

    Read the article

  • Procedural world generation oriented on gameplay features

    - by Richard Fabian
    In large procedural landscape games, the land seems dull, but that's probably because the real world is largely dull, with only limited places where the scenery is dramatic or tactical. Looking at world generation from this point of view, a landscape generator for a game (that is, not for the sake of scenery, but for the sake of gameplay) needs to not follow the rules of landscaping, but instead some rules married to the expectations of the gamer. For example, there could be a choke point / route generator that creates hills ravines, rivers and mountains between cities, rather than the natural way cities arise, scattered on the land based on resources or conditions generated by the mountains and rainfall patterns. Is there any existing work being done like this? Start with cities or population centres and then add in terrain afterwards? The reason I'm asking is that I'd previously pondered taking existing maps from fantasy fiction (my own and others), putting the information into the system as a base point, and then generating a good world to play in from it. This seems covered by existing technology, that is, where the designer puts in all the necessary information such as the city populations, resources, biomes, road networks and rivers, then allows the PCG fill in the gaps. But now I'm wondering if it may be possible to have a content generator generate also the overall design. Generate the cities and population centres, balancing them so that there is a natural seeming need of commerce, then generate the positions and connectivity, then from the type of city produce the list of necessary resources that must be nearby, and only then, maybe given some rules on how to make the journey between cities both believable and interesting, generate the final content including the roads, the choke points, the bridges and tunnels, ferries and the terrain including the biomes and coastline necessary. If this has been done before, I'd like to know, and would like to know what went wrong, and what went right.

    Read the article

  • Checking out systems programming, what should I learn, using what resources?

    - by Anto
    I have done some hobby application development, but now I'm interested in checking out systems programming (mainly operating systems, Linux kernel etc.). I know low-level languages like C, and I know minimal amounts of x86 Assembly (should I improve on it?). What resources/books/websites/projects etc. do you recommend for one to get started with systems programming and what topics are important? Note that I know close to nothing about the subject, so whatever resources you suggest should be introductory resources. I still know what the subject is and what it includes etc., but I have not done systems programming before (but some application development, as previously noted, and I'm familiar with a bunch of programming languages as well as software engineering in general and algorithms, data structures etc.).

    Read the article

  • What are some good resources for learning about file systems? [closed]

    - by Daniel
    I'd like to learn about file system design at a very detailed level. I'm currently in a graduate level operating systems course, and we're currently going over file systems. We mostly discuss papers and such, but our semester long project is to implement a log-structured file system using fuse and a virtual disk. Are there any good books that focus heavily on file system design and implementation? I have some conceptual clouding on things that seem very basic such as "when we say that an inode has pointers to blocks, do we mean anything besides the inode keeping track of block numbers? Is there any other format for 'disk pointers'?" I'm actually looking at file system design to start my career, so I'm probably going to try to implement a more traditional file system with fuse and our virtual disk format after this course is over.

    Read the article

  • Role of systems in entity systems architecture

    - by bio595
    I've been reading a lot about entity components and systems and have thought that the idea of an entity just being an ID is quite interesting. However I don't know how this completely works with the components aspect or the systems aspect. A component is just a data object managed by some relevant system. A collision system uses some BoundsComponent together with a spatial data structure to determine if collisions have happened. All good so far, but what if multiple systems need access to the same component? Where should the data live? An input system could modify an entities BoundsComponent, but the physics system(s) need access to the same component as does some rendering system. Also, how are entities constructed? One of the advantages I've read so much about is flexibility in entity construction. Are systems intrinsically tied to a component? If I want to introduce some new component, do I also have to introduce a new system or modify an existing one? Another thing that I've read often is that the 'type' of an entity is inferred by what components it has. If my entity is just an id how can I know that my robot entity needs to be moved or rendered and thus modified by some system? Sorry for the long post (or at least it seems so from my phone screen)!

    Read the article

  • Difference Procedural Generation and Random Generation

    - by U-No-Poo
    Today, I got into an argument about the term "procedural generation". My point was that its different from "classic" random generation in the way that procedural is based on a more mathematical, fractal based, algorithm leading to a more "realistic" distribution and the usual randomness of most languages are based on a pseudo-random-number generator, leading to an "unrealistic", in a way, ugly, distribution. This discussion was made with a heightmap in mind. The discussion left me somehow unconvinced about my own arguments though, so, is there more to it? Or am I the one who is, in fact, simply wrong?

    Read the article

  • Design patterns frequently seen in embedded systems programming

    - by softwarelover
    I don't have any question related to coding. My concerns are about embedded systems programming independent of any particular programming language. Because I am new in the realm of embedded programming, I would quite appreciate responses from those who consider themselves experienced embedded systems programmers. I basically have 2 questions. Of the design patterns listed below are there any seen frequently in embedded systems programming? Abstraction-Occurrence pattern General Hierarchy pattern Player-Role pattern Singleton pattern Observer pattern Delegation pattern Adapter pattern Facade pattern Immutable pattern Read-Only Interface pattern Proxy pattern As an experienced embedded developer, what design patterns have you, as an individual, come across? There is no need to describe the details. Only the pattern names would suffice. Please share your own experience. I believe the answers to the above questions would work as a good starting point for any novice programmers in the embedded world.

    Read the article

  • Map Generation Algorithms for Minecraft Clone

    - by Danjen
    I'm making a Minecraft clone for the sake of it (with some inspriation from Dwarf Fortress) and had a few questions about the way the world generation is handled. Things I want it to cover: Biomes such as hills, mountains, forests, etc. Caves/caverns/tunnels Procedural (so it stretches to infinity... is wrap-around a possibility?) Breaking the map into smaller chunks Moddable (ie, new terrain types) Multiplayer compatible In particular, I've seen things such as Perlin Noise, Heightmaps, and Marching Cubes thrown around. These are like different tools to use, but I don't know when or why I would use them. Are there any other techniques that are useful for map generation? I realize this is borderline subjective and open-ended, but I am looking for some more insight into the processes involved.

    Read the article

  • Realistic planetary terrain generation with weights

    - by Programmdude
    I need terrain generation for a planet. The planet will be divided up into several hundred hexes, and I need it to be realistic and based on weights. I have dabbled in terrain generation before, but nothing like this. So I figure it would be a good idea to ask the community for answers, recommended articles or the like. By realistic, I mean not just random hexes, but continent shaped things with a few islands. More desert around the equator and more ice around the poles. I also have two weights I need to base it around: ice percentage and water percentage. That means that around XX% of the planet will need to be water. Does anyone have any advice or places to start? Generating arbitrary terrain is easy, but something a bit more "organic" like this seems rather difficult. It also needs to be seamless. Should be obvious since it's a planet, but no harm in pointing it out.

    Read the article

  • Full Portfolio of x86 Systems On Display at Oracle OpenWorld

    - by kgee
    This OpenWorld, Oracle’s x86 hardware team will have two hardware demos, showcasing the new X3 systems, as well as several other x86 solutions such as the ZFS Storage Appliance, Oracle Database Appliance and the Carrier Grade NETRA systems. These two demos are located in the South Hall in Oracle’s booth 1133 and Intel’s booth 1101.  The Intel booth will feature additional demos including 3D demos of each server, a static architectural demo, the Oracle x86 Grand Prix video game and the Intel Theatre featuring several presentations by Intel’s partners. Oracle’s Intel Theatre Schedule and Topics Include:Monday 1. 10:30 a.m. - Engineered to Work Together: Oracle x86 Systems in the Data Center2. 12:30 a.m. - The Oracle NoSQL Database on the Intel Platform.3. 1:30 p.m. - Accelerate Your Path to Cloud with Oracle VM4. 3:30 p.m. - Why Oracle Linux is the Best Linux for Your Intel Based Systems5. 4:30 p.m. - Accelerate Your Path to Cloud with Oracle VMTuesday 1. 10:00 a.m. - Speed of thought” Analytics using In-Memory Analytics2. 1:30 a.m. - A Storage Architecture for Big Data:  "It’s Not JUST Hadoop"3. 2:00 a.m. - Oracle Optimized Solution for Enterprise Cloud Infrastructure.4. 2:30 p.m. - Configuring Storage to Optimize Database Performance and Efficiency.5. 3:30 p.m. - Total Cloud Control for Oracle's x86 SystemsWednesday 1. 10:00 a.m. - Big Data Analysis Using R-Programming Language2. 11:30 a.m. - Extreme Performance Overview, The Oracle Exadata Database Machine3. 1:30 p.m. - Oracle Times Ten In-Memory Database Overview

    Read the article

  • Software licensing and code generation

    - by Nicol Bolas
    I'm developing a tool that generates code from some various data. The tool itself will be licensed with the MIT license, which strikes a good balance for me in terms of allowing the freedom to use and modify it, while still holding the copyright. OK, but what is the legal status of the code generated by the tool? Who holds the copyright for code generated by a tool? Do I need to give users of the tool a license for the generated code, or do they already have that by virtue of it being generated by them? What is different about this code generation system (which may be relevant) is that the source information about the code generation is provided by the system itself. The user doesn't feed source data in; the source data is bundled along with it. They simply have the means to transform it in various ways (filtering out parts of the data they don't want, etc). Obviously they could edit the bundled data. Does that affect anything about this?

    Read the article

  • What's the best language combo for code generation?

    - by Peter Turner
    I read through Code Generation in Action but never bothered to make anything of it because Ruby just doesn't fit with my lifestyle at this juncture. The book came out more on the cusp of the C# revolution, and it said that C# "was a language designed to be generated", apparently using Ruby as the generator language. In your experience, what is the ideal combination of languages to generate the most useful code?

    Read the article

  • Enterprise vs Real time embedded systems

    - by JakeFisher
    In university I have 2 options for software architecture: Enterprise Real time embedded systems I would be very glad if someone can give me a brief explanation of what those are. I am interested in following criterias: Brief overview Complexity and interest. So does knowledge costs time? Area of usage Profit(salary) Working tools, programs. Might be some text editor, uml editor. Something else?

    Read the article

  • Languages on embedded systems in aeronautic and spatial sector

    - by Niels
    I know that my question is very broad but a general answer would be nice. I would like to know which are the main languages used in aeronautic and spatial sector. I know that the OS which run on embedded systems are RTOS (Real time OS) and I think that, this languages must be checked correctly by different methods (formal methods, unit tests) and must permit a sure verification of whole process of a program.

    Read the article

  • Procedural object generation and unique identification

    - by 2080
    My question relates to procedural content generation and data management of the emerging objects in a database. I assume a networked game, with a server-client model. Unspecified objects in the game world are generated while the game is running with procedural algorithms (for example perlin noise). The players (/clients) can modify the properties of these objects, but have to notify the server of these changes. How could this communication address unique objects, so that both the server and the client know of which object they are speaking? Not only the inner properties of the objects can differ, but also visible, such as the position. When the player wants to select one of these objects the game has to find out the id - does anyone know which methods or algorithms can accomplish that?

    Read the article

  • How to create reproducible probability in map generation?

    - by nickbadal
    So for my game, I'm using perlin noise to generate regions of my map (water/land, forest/grass) but I'd also like to create some probability based generation too. For instance: if(nextInt(10) > 2 && tile.adjacentTo(Type.WATER)) tile.setType(Type.SAND); This works fine, and is even reproduceable (based on a common seed) if the nextInt() calls are always in the same order. The issue is that in my game, the world is generated on demand, based on the player's location. This means, that if I explore the map differently, and the chunks of the map are generated in a different order, the randomness is no longer consistent. How can I get this sort of randomness to be consistent, independent of call order? Thanks in advance :)

    Read the article

  • How to Avoid Your Next 12-Month Science Project

    - by constant
    While most customers immediately understand how the magic of Oracle's Hybrid Columnar Compression, intelligent storage servers and flash memory make Exadata uniquely powerful against home-grown database systems, some people think that Exalogic is nothing more than a bunch of x86 servers, a storage appliance and an InfiniBand (IB) network, built into a single rack. After all, isn't this exactly what the High Performance Computing (HPC) world has been doing for decades? On the surface, this may be true. And some people tried exactly that: They tried to put together their own version of Exalogic, but then they discover there's a lot more to building a system than buying hardware and assembling it together. IT is not Ikea. Why is that so? Could it be there's more going on behind the scenes than merely putting together a bunch of servers, a storage array and an InfiniBand network into a rack? Let's explore some of the special sauce that makes Exalogic unique and un-copyable, so you can save yourself from your next 6- to 12-month science project that distracts you from doing real work that adds value to your company. Engineering Systems is Hard Work! The backbone of Exalogic is its InfiniBand network: 4 times better bandwidth than even 10 Gigabit Ethernet, and only about a tenth of its latency. What a potential for increased scalability and throughput across the middleware and database layers! But InfiniBand is a beast that needs to be tamed: It is true that Exalogic uses a standard, open-source Open Fabrics Enterprise Distribution (OFED) InfiniBand driver stack. Unfortunately, this software has been developed by the HPC community with fastest speed in mind (which is good) but, despite the name, not many other enterprise-class requirements are included (which is less good). Here are some of the improvements that Oracle's InfiniBand development team had to add to the OFED stack to make it enterprise-ready, simply because typical HPC users didn't have the need to implement them: More than 100 bug fixes in the pieces that were not related to the Message Passing Interface Protocol (MPI), which is the protocol that HPC users use most of the time, but which is less useful in the enterprise. Performance optimizations and tuning across the whole IB stack: From Switches, Host Channel Adapters (HCAs) and drivers to low-level protocols, middleware and applications. Yes, even the standard HPC IB stack could be improved in terms of performance. Ethernet over IB (EoIB): Exalogic uses InfiniBand internally to reach high performance, but it needs to play nicely with datacenters around it. That's why Oracle added Ethernet over InfiniBand technology to it that allows for creating many virtual 10GBE adapters inside Exalogic's nodes that are aggregated and connected to Exalogic's IB gateway switches. While this is an open standard, it's up to the vendor to implement it. In this case, Oracle integrated the EoIB stack with Oracle's own IB to 10GBE gateway switches, and made it fully virtualized from the beginning. This means that Exalogic customers can completely rewire their server infrastructure inside the rack without having to physically pull or plug a single cable - a must-have for every cloud deployment. Anybody who wants to match this level of integration would need to add an InfiniBand switch development team to their project. Or just buy Oracle's gateway switches, which are conveniently shipped with a whole server infrastructure attached! IPv6 support for InfiniBand's Sockets Direct Protocol (SDP), Reliable Datagram Sockets (RDS), TCP/IP over IB (IPoIB) and EoIB protocols. Because no IPv6 = not very enterprise-class. HA capability for SDP. High Availability is not a big requirement for HPC, but for enterprise-class application servers it is. Every node in Exalogic's InfiniBand network is connected twice for redundancy. If any cable or port or HCA fails, there's always a replacement link ready to take over. This requires extra magic at the protocol level to work. So in addition to Weblogic's failover capabilities, Oracle implemented IB automatic path migration at the SDP level to avoid unnecessary failover operations at the middleware level. Security, for example spoof-protection. Another feature that is less important for traditional users of InfiniBand, but very important for enterprise customers. InfiniBand Partitioning and Quality-of-Service (QoS): One of the first questions we get from customers about Exalogic is: “How can we implement multi-tenancy?” The answer is to partition your IB network, which effectively creates many networks that work independently and that are protected at the lowest networking layer possible. In addition to that, QoS allows administrators to prioritize traffic flow in multi-tenancy environments so they can keep their service levels where it matters most. Resilient IB Fabric Management: InfiniBand is a self-managing network, so a lot of the magic lies in coming up with the right topology and in teaching the subnet manager how to properly discover and manage the network. Oracle's Infiniband switches come with pre-integrated, highly available fabric management with seamless integration into Oracle Enterprise Manager Ops Center. In short: Oracle elevated the OFED InfiniBand stack into an enterprise-class networking infrastructure. Many years and multiple teams of manpower went into the above improvements - this is something you can only get from Oracle, because no other InfiniBand vendor can give you these features across the whole stack! Exabus: Because it's not About the Size of Your Network, it's How You Use it! So let's assume that you somehow were able to get your hands on an enterprise-class IB driver stack. Or maybe you don't care and are just happy with the standard OFED one? Anyway, the next step is to actually leverage that InfiniBand performance. Here are the choices: Use traditional TCP/IP on top of the InfiniBand stack, Develop your own integration between your middleware and the lower-level (but faster) InfiniBand protocols. While more bandwidth is always a good thing, it's actually the low latency that enables superior performance for your applications when running on any networking infrastructure: The lower the latency, the faster the response travels through the network and the more transactions you can close per second. The reason why InfiniBand is such a low latency technology is that it gets rid of most if not all of your traditional networking protocol stack: Data is literally beamed from one region of RAM in one server into another region of RAM in another server with no kernel/drivers/UDP/TCP or other networking stack overhead involved! Which makes option 1 a no-go: Adding TCP/IP on top of InfiniBand is like adding training wheels to your racing bike. It may be ok in the beginning and for development, but it's not quite the performance IB was meant to deliver. Which only leaves option 2: Integrating your middleware with fast, low-level InfiniBand protocols. And this is what Exalogic's "Exabus" technology is all about. Here are a few Exabus features that help applications leverage the performance of InfiniBand in Exalogic: RDMA and SDP integration at the JDBC driver level (SDP), for Oracle Weblogic (SDP), Oracle Coherence (RDMA), Oracle Tuxedo (RDMA) and the new Oracle Traffic Director (RDMA) on Exalogic. Using these protocols, middleware can communicate a lot faster with each other and the Oracle database than by using standard networking protocols, Seamless Integration of Ethernet over InfiniBand from Exalogic's Gateway switches into the OS, Oracle Weblogic optimizations for handling massive amounts of parallel transactions. Because if you have an 8-lane Autobahn, you also need to improve your ramps so you can feed it with many cars in parallel. Integration of Weblogic with Oracle Exadata for faster performance, optimized session management and failover. As you see, “Exabus” is Oracle's word for describing all the InfiniBand enhancements Oracle put into Exalogic: OFED stack enhancements, protocols for faster IB access, and InfiniBand support and optimizations at the virtualization and middleware level. All working together to deliver the full potential of InfiniBand performance. Who else has 100% control over their middleware so they can develop their own low-level protocol integration with InfiniBand? Even if you take an open source approach, you're looking at years of development work to create, test and support a whole new networking technology in your middleware! The Extras: Less Hassle, More Productivity, Faster Time to Market And then there are the other advantages of Engineered Systems that are true for Exalogic the same as they are for every other Engineered System: One simple purchasing process: No headaches due to endless RFPs and no “Will X work with Y?” uncertainties. Everything has been engineered together: All kinds of bugs and problems have been already fixed at the design level that would have only manifested themselves after you have built the system from scratch. Everything is built, tested and integrated at the factory level . Less integration pain for you, faster time to market. Every Exalogic machine world-wide is identical to Oracle's own machines in the lab: Instant replication of any problems you may encounter, faster time to resolution. Simplified patching, management and operations. One throat to choke: Imagine finger-pointing hell for systems that have been put together using several different vendors. Oracle's Engineered Systems have a single phone number that customers can call to get their problems solved. For more business-centric values, read The Business Value of Engineered Systems. Conclusion: Buy Exalogic, or get ready for a 6-12 Month Science Project And here's the reason why it's not easy to "build your own Exalogic": There's a lot of work required to make such a system fly. In fact, anybody who is starting to "just put together a bunch of servers and an InfiniBand network" is really looking at a 6-12 month science project. And the outcome is likely to not be very enterprise-class. And it won't have Exalogic's performance either. Because building an Engineered System is literally rocket science: It takes a lot of time, effort, resources and many iterations of design/test/analyze/fix to build such a system. That's why InfiniBand has been reserved for HPC scientists for such a long time. And only Oracle can bring the power of InfiniBand in an enterprise-class, ready-to use, pre-integrated version to customers, without the develop/integrate/support pain. For more details, check the new Exalogic overview white paper which was updated only recently. P.S.: Thanks to my colleagues Ola, Paul, Don and Andy for helping me put together this article! var flattr_uid = '26528'; var flattr_tle = 'How to Avoid Your Next 12-Month Science Project'; var flattr_dsc = 'While most customers immediately understand how the magic of Oracle's Hybrid Columnar Compression, intelligent storage servers and flash memory make Exadata uniquely powerful against home-grown database systems, some people think that Exalogic is nothing more than a bunch of x86 servers, a storage appliance and an InfiniBand (IB) network, built into a single rack.After all, isn't this exactly what the High Performance Computing (HPC) world has been doing for decades?On the surface, this may be true. And some people tried exactly that: They tried to put together their own version of Exalogic, but then they discover there's a lot more to building a system than buying hardware and assembling it together. IT is not Ikea.Why is that so? Could it be there's more going on behind the scenes than merely putting together a bunch of servers, a storage array and an InfiniBand network into a rack? Let's explore some of the special sauce that makes Exalogic unique and un-copyable, so you can save yourself from your next 6- to 12-month science project that distracts you from doing real work that adds value to your company.'; var flattr_tag = 'Engineered Systems,Engineered Systems,Infiniband,Integration,latency,Oracle,performance'; var flattr_cat = 'text'; var flattr_url = 'http://constantin.glez.de/blog/2012/04/how-avoid-your-next-12-month-science-project'; var flattr_lng = 'en_GB'

    Read the article

  • Code Generation and IDE vs writing per Hand

    - by sytycs
    I have been programming for about a year now. Pretty soon I realized that I need a great Tool for writing code and learned Vim. I was happy with C and Ruby and never liked the idea of an IDE. Which was encouraged by a lot of reading about programming.[1] However I started with (my first) Java Project. In a CS Course we were using Visual Paradigm and encouraged to let the program generate our code from a class diagram. I did not like that Idea because: Our class diagram was buggy. Students more experienced in Java said they would write the code per hand. I had never written any Java before and would not understand a lot of the generated code. So I took a different approach and wrote all methods per Hand (getter and Setter included). My Team-members have written their parts (partly generated by VP) in an IDE and I was "forced" to use it too. I realized they had generated equal amounts of code in a shorter amount of time and did not spend a lot of time setting their CLASSPATH and writing scripts for compiling that son of a b***. Additionally we had to implement a GUI and I dont see how we could have done that in a sane matter in Vim. So here is my Problem: I fell in love with Vim and the Unix way. But it looks like for getting this job done (on time) the IDE/Code generation approach is superior. Do you have equal experiences? Is Java by the nature of the language just more suitable for an IDE/Code generated approach? Or am I lacking the knowledge to produce equal amounts of code "per Hand"? [1] http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/~matloff/eclipse.html

    Read the article

  • Speeding up procedural texture generation

    - by FalconNL
    Recently I've begun working on a game that takes place in a procedurally generated solar system. After a bit of a learning curve (having neither worked with Scala, OpenGL 2 ES or Libgdx before), I have a basic tech demo going where you spin around a single procedurally textured planet: The problem I'm running into is the performance of the texture generation. A quick overview of what I'm doing: a planet is a cube that has been deformed to a sphere. To each side, a n x n (e.g. 256 x 256) texture is applied, which are bundled in one 8n x n texture that is sent to the fragment shader. The last two spaces are not used, they're only there to make sure the width is a power of 2. The texture is currently generated on the CPU, using the updated 2012 version of the simplex noise algorithm linked to in the paper 'Simplex noise demystified'. The scene I'm using to test the algorithm contains two spheres: the planet and the background. Both use a greyscale texture consisting of six octaves of 3D simplex noise, so for example if we choose 128x128 as the texture size there are 128 x 128 x 6 x 2 x 6 = about 1.2 million calls to the noise function. The closest you will get to the planet is about what's shown in the screenshot and since the game's target resolution is 1280x720 that means I'd prefer to use 512x512 textures. Combine that with the fact the actual textures will of course be more complicated than basic noise (There will be a day and night texture, blended in the fragment shader based on sunlight, and a specular mask. I need noise for continents, terrain color variation, clouds, city lights, etc.) and we're looking at something like 512 x 512 x 6 x 3 x 15 = 70 million noise calls for the planet alone. In the final game, there will be activities when traveling between planets, so a wait of 5 or 10 seconds, possibly 20, would be acceptable since I can calculate the texture in the background while traveling, though obviously the faster the better. Getting back to our test scene, performance on my PC isn't too terrible, though still too slow considering the final result is going to be about 60 times worse: 128x128 : 0.1s 256x256 : 0.4s 512x512 : 1.7s This is after I moved all performance-critical code to Java, since trying to do so in Scala was a lot worse. Running this on my phone (a Samsung Galaxy S3), however, produces a more problematic result: 128x128 : 2s 256x256 : 7s 512x512 : 29s Already far too long, and that's not even factoring in the fact that it'll be minutes instead of seconds in the final version. Clearly something needs to be done. Personally, I see a few potential avenues, though I'm not particularly keen on any of them yet: Don't precalculate the textures, but let the fragment shader calculate everything. Probably not feasible, because at one point I had the background as a fullscreen quad with a pixel shader and I got about 1 fps on my phone. Use the GPU to render the texture once, store it and use the stored texture from then on. Upside: might be faster than doing it on the CPU since the GPU is supposed to be faster at floating point calculations. Downside: effects that cannot (easily) be expressed as functions of simplex noise (e.g. gas planet vortices, moon craters, etc.) are a lot more difficult to code in GLSL than in Scala/Java. Calculate a large amount of noise textures and ship them with the application. I'd like to avoid this if at all possible. Lower the resolution. Buys me a 4x performance gain, which isn't really enough plus I lose a lot of quality. Find a faster noise algorithm. If anyone has one I'm all ears, but simplex is already supposed to be faster than perlin. Adopt a pixel art style, allowing for lower resolution textures and fewer noise octaves. While I originally envisioned the game in this style, I've come to prefer the realistic approach. I'm doing something wrong and the performance should already be one or two orders of magnitude better. If this is the case, please let me know. If anyone has any suggestions, tips, workarounds, or other comments regarding this problem I'd love to hear them.

    Read the article

  • Operating systems theory -- using minimum number of semaphores

    - by stackuser
    This situation is prone to deadlock of processes in an operating system and I'd like to solve it with the minimum of semaphores. Basically there are three cooperating processes that all read data from the same input device. Each process, when it gets the input device, must read two consecutive data. I want to use mutual exclusion to do this. Semaphores should be used to synchronize: P1: P2: P3: input(a1,a2) input (b1,b2) input(c1,c2) Y=a1+c1 W=b2+c2 Z=a2+b1 Print (X) X=Z-Y+W The declaration and initialization that I think would work here are: semaphore s=1 sa1 = 0, sa2 = 0, sb1 = 0, sb2 = 0, sc1 = 0, sc2 = 0 I'm sure that any kernel programmers that happen on this can knock this out in a minute or 2. Diagram of cooperating Processes and one input device: It seems like P1 and P2 would start something like: wait(s) input (a1/b1, a2/b2) signal(s)

    Read the article

  • Heightmap generation

    - by Ziaix
    I want to implement something like this to create a heightmap: 'Place a group of coordinates evenly across a map, and give them height values within a certain range. Repeatedly create coordinates between all of those coordinates, setting their height by deriving a value that was a mean value of all the surrounding coordinates.' However, I'm not sure how I would go about it - I'm not sure how I could code the part where I place the coordinates in between the existing coordinates. Can anyone give any help/advice?

    Read the article

  • Procedural Generation of tile-based 2d World

    - by Matthias
    I am writing a 2d game that uses tile-based top-down graphics to build the world (i.e. the ground plane). Manually made this works fine. Now I want to generate the ground plane procedurally at run time. In other words: I want to place the tiles (their textures) randomised on the fly. Of course I cannot create an endless ground plane, so I need to restrict how far from the player character (on which the camera focuses on) I procedurally generate the ground floor. My approach would be like this: I have a 2d grid that stores all tiles of the floor at their correct x/y coordinates within the game world. When the players moves the character, therefore also the camera, I constantly check whether there are empty locations in my x/y map within a max. distance from the character, i.e. cells in my virtual grid that have no tile set. In such a case I place a new tile there. Therefore the player would always see the ground plane without gaps or empty spots. I guess that would work, but I am not sure whether that would be the best approach. Is there a better alternative, maybe even a best-practice for my case?

    Read the article

  • Web application framework for embedded systems?

    - by datenwolf
    I'm currently developing the software for a measurement and control system. In addition to the usual SCPI interface I'd also give it a nice HTTP frontend. Now I don't want to reinvent the wheel all over again. I already have a simple HTTPD running, but I don't want to implement all the other stuff. So what I'm looking for is a web application toolkit targeted at embedded system development. In particular this has to run on a ARM Cortex-M4, and I have some 8k of RAM available for this. It must be written in C. Is there such a thing or do I have to implement this myself?

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >