3 ms·
The scripting language looks like it would be more cumbersome to use than C.
by cmovq 8mo ago
The scripting language looks like it would be more cumbersome to use than C.
- RodgerTheGreat 8mo agoI did a double-take at > Executes one line of script per frame (~60 lines/sec). Makes the "runs at 60FPS" aspect of the engine feel a lot less relevant. At this speed, anything more complex than Pong would be a struggle. Even a CHIP-8 interpreter is usually expected handle a dozen or so comparably expressive instructions per frame.
- nxobject 8mo agoDon’t worry, you can’t have that many lines anyway… > Up to 128 script lines per program
- famahar 8mo agoWhich is why I love this. Extreme constraints. Takes a lot of creativity to make something interesting, without feeling overwhelmed with possibility. I'm considering making tiny arthouse game projects with this.
- azharav 8mo ago،sh12
- networked 8mo agoI agree. It seems like interpreting one instruction per frame is the developer's way to guarantee real-time performance. I don't want to discourage the developer from experimenting with this design. What I think they should do is determine the most instructions they can interpret each frame. I like the idea of on-device programming like this. While I haven't used it, I know there is a DSiWare application Petit Computer that lets you implement more complex (sprite-based) games in a Basic dialect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petit_Computer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petit_Computer. As DSiWare, it has an official video trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AYlEo3rJHs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AYlEo3rJHs.