Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Only Unbreakable Law [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–107 of 107 posts

Re: The Only Unbreakable Law [video]

#101

Post by holyyikes »

krapp wrote: post #66
hahamrfunnyguy wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say it's more like a builder arguing against building codes. A high-quality building can certain be built without them, but sticking to some known formulas makes sure that everyone working on it is able to anticipate what others are going to do. It also makes sure that the building won't collapse, though this aspect doesn't really apply to software. Software has gotten a lot more complicated since the 1990's…

On the other hand, Casey's been working on Handmade Hero for almost a decade, and has what amounts to an overengineered debug room with less actual gameplay complexity than you'd find in any framework tutorial. Meanwhile actual game developers would pick up a framework, use all those abstractions and libraries Casey finds unnecessary and surpass Handmade Hero in an afternoon. There's something to be said for not wast…

What's hilarious is that if you actually look at the code he's written for it, it's a horrible ball of spaghetti. The whole thing is a scam. Just because HE says "this is bad code" doesn't mean it's bad, and just because he wrote it, it doesn't mean it's good. Most people would find the clusterfuck he wrote unmaintainable, and the funny thing is that it doesn't even really DO ANYTHING YET.

Re: The Only Unbreakable Law [video]

#102

Post by holyyikes »

HexDecOctBin wrote: post #47
holyyikes wrote: post #41

Quoted post unavailable.

> You can safely ignore this guy. Thanks for telling us this. We might have thought for ourselves based on the content, but now we don't need to.

When he can't make a video shorter than 50 minutes, figuring it out for yourself is a pretty serious time investment, but whatever.

Re: The Only Unbreakable Law [video]

#103

Post by teddyh »

holyyikes wrote: post #99
teddyh wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SOLID is for long-term development and use software. Games are developed during a relatively short time, and then released, and then not changed very much. The next game is developed independently, as a separate project and effort. SOLID is meant to alleviate continous development where changes and new features are constantly needed. Game development does not easily fit in this mold.

Tell that to World of Warcraft. Really is hilarious just how goddamned clueless most of the comments in this thread are.

Please don’t misunderstand me; I really think that SOLID is good to follow. My comment was more meant to express understanding for people having doubts about SOLID in situations where the SOLID principles don’t give as much of an obvious benefit.

Re: The Only Unbreakable Law [video]

#104

Post by Dudeman112 »

ukj wrote: post #79
Dudeman112 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What scientific procedure would you use to establish whether one working scientific model “matches” reality; while another working model doesn’t? See what model1 gives as a prediction for input X. See what model2 gives as a prediction for input X. Input X in the world and compare what actually happened. The models that more closely predict the observations are more likely to reflect reality (aka being closer to the…

You haven’t really tackled the strongest interpretation of my question head on. If two different models/theories are observationally equivalent; if two (or more) different curves can be fitted to the same dataset which model is “more true”? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observational_equivalence https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-underdetermina... And how do you go from “F=ma for the usual symbols…” to sol…

>If two different models/theories are observationally equivalent; if two (or more) different curves can be fitted to the same dataset which model is “more true”?

You don't know which one is more likely to be true (all other things being equal). However, if all else isn't equal and you are well acquainted with a Mr Bayes you can probably do all sorts of fancy Mathematics to estimate which model is more likely to be true. Or just go with your hunch. Or find yourself a dataset that will invalidate one or both of your models.

Mind you, I don't think this is an issue for most subjects. How often do you get different functions that spew the same output in the all observable and theoretical instances?

>If you begin asking questions such as “is the model true or not? Do the terms in the equation correspond to real world entities?” you are no longer doing science, you are doing philosophy

Yes, people often do that when they are engrossed in a subject. Most scientists I met care about the subject they are working on and philosophise a lot about it. Some don't anymore, possibly because working in the academy should be considered a carcinogenic hazard by the World Health Organization.

When talking about scientists people sometimes forget that they are human, often driven towards the career by just wanting to know. They care if their models match / are close to reality to the best of their knowledge.

Do remember that we are talking about scientists, not science. Almost everyone I met in my short time in the academy fundamentally cared if their models closely matched reality. Most of them didn't get where they ended up at for utilitarian reasons, and lots of them are on a permanent state of annoyance at not being able to fill some forms with "I'm just curious" to get funds.

Re: The Only Unbreakable Law [video]

#105

Post by ukj »

Dudeman112 wrote: post #104
ukj wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You haven’t really tackled the strongest interpretation of my question head on. If two different models/theories are observationally equivalent; if two (or more) different curves can be fitted to the same dataset which model is “more true”? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observational_equivalence https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-underdetermina... And how do you go from “F=ma for the usual symbols…” to sol…

>If two different models/theories are observationally equivalent; if two (or more) different curves can be fitted to the same dataset which model is “more true”? You don't know which one is more likely to be true (all other things being equal). However, if all else isn't equal and you are well acquainted with a Mr Bayes you can probably do all sorts of fancy Mathematics to estimate which model is more likely to be tr…

>However, if all else isn't equal and you are well acquainted with a Mr Bayes you can probably do all sorts of fancy Mathematics to estimate which model is more likely to be true.

But you still need to tell Mr Bayes what your criteria are for model-selection.

So the output of your calculations is some scalar "truth-value" (higher is better) - what's your input?

In simpler terms: the truthfulness of your model is a function of... what ?

>Mind you, I don't think this is an issue for most subjects. How often do you get different functions that spew the same output in the all observable and theoretical instances?

In curve fitting? Practically all the time! It is a mathematical fact that infinitely many curves fit a finite dataset. So we pick curves that fit approximately, not exactly with the obvious underfitting/overfitting optimisation problem that needs solving in conjunction.

Re: The Only Unbreakable Law [video]

#106

Post by Jadinette »

holyyikes wrote: post #101
krapp wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, Casey's been working on Handmade Hero for almost a decade, and has what amounts to an overengineered debug room with less actual gameplay complexity than you'd find in any framework tutorial. Meanwhile actual game developers would pick up a framework, use all those abstractions and libraries Casey finds unnecessary and surpass Handmade Hero in an afternoon. There's something to be said for not wast…

What's hilarious is that if you actually look at the code he's written for it, it's a horrible ball of spaghetti. The whole thing is a scam. Just because HE says "this is bad code" doesn't mean it's bad, and just because he wrote it, it doesn't mean it's good. Most people would find the clusterfuck he wrote unmaintainable, and the funny thing is that it doesn't even really DO ANYTHING YET.

The goal of Handmade Hero is to show how to do everything from scratch, not how to make a game as fast as possible using existing technology. I agree that the game is currently light on the gameplay side of things, but he said countless times that he doesn't like gameplay code and that he's an engine programmer. I don't know if you watched a lot of episodes, but actually, each hour of him programming is full of complicated stuff which is hard to follow, but he does that in the blink of an eye. Each time you think that you understood something, he starts doing something way more complicated and he always nails it. Look at how many programming streamers are able to speak 2+ hours continuously without any cut. Most of the youtubers have to look at their source code written before turning the camera on to be able to retype it during the video! Even for a simple Tetris or something!

I'm curious to know what you think is unmaintainable in his codebase. Sure he uses alternative little-known techniques for say, memory management, but once you know what is going on, the code is pretty clear I think.

He posted an issue about the Windows terminal being slow, and proposed simple things to speed things up. What happened? The Windows Terminal team declared that what he proposed is an entire doctoral research project that would be a massive investment. He did the freaking thing in 2 days and said that it's "nothing" and "very simple". The team then apologized for being dumb and is now working on implementing his idea, that they described as "original" and "very valuable"

Re: The Only Unbreakable Law [video]

#107

Post by holyyikes »

Jadinette wrote: post #106
holyyikes wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's hilarious is that if you actually look at the code he's written for it, it's a horrible ball of spaghetti. The whole thing is a scam. Just because HE says "this is bad code" doesn't mean it's bad, and just because he wrote it, it doesn't mean it's good. Most people would find the clusterfuck he wrote unmaintainable, and the funny thing is that it doesn't even really DO ANYTHING YET.

The goal of Handmade Hero is to show how to do everything from scratch, not how to make a game as fast as possible using existing technology. I agree that the game is currently light on the gameplay side of things, but he said countless times that he doesn't like gameplay code and that he's an engine programmer. I don't know if you watched a lot of episodes, but actually, each hour of him programming is full of compl…

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN