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

Gamedev in Lisp. Part 2: Dungeons and Interfaces

gitlab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–68 of 68 posts

Re: Gamedev in Lisp. Part 2: Dungeons and Interfaces

#61

Post by rscho »

BoingBoomTschak wrote: post #60
shawn_w wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Racket splits up the iteration forms from what to iterate over (sequences[1]). You can compose different sequence constructors together, or make brand new ones, without introducing new syntax. It has limited destructuring - sequences can return multiple values, all of which can be bound. There's an adapter to convert one that does that into returning a single list, but not the other way around. If there was it could…

Ah, I see, though I'd say it pollutes the function namespace a bit this way (as "in-x" semantically only makes sense in a loop) and missing on-list. Technically, you could do most of these in a few lines of CL too, but well, convenience is the point of these macros. Those seem to return sequences instead of streams/iterators, any idea why? Though it says "An in-list application can provide better performance for list…

racket does not differentiate between () [] {}, so you don't have to use square brackets if you don't like them.

Re: Gamedev in Lisp. Part 2: Dungeons and Interfaces

#62

Post by BoingBoomTschak »

rscho wrote: post #61
BoingBoomTschak wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, I see, though I'd say it pollutes the function namespace a bit this way (as "in-x" semantically only makes sense in a loop) and missing on-list. Technically, you could do most of these in a few lines of CL too, but well, convenience is the point of these macros. Those seem to return sequences instead of streams/iterators, any idea why? Though it says "An in-list application can provide better performance for list…

racket does not differentiate between () [] {}, so you don't have to use square brackets if you don't like them.

I know but I have to read them =)

Re: Gamedev in Lisp. Part 2: Dungeons and Interfaces

#63

Post by resatori »

rtpg wrote: post #52

Tiled is great. I really wish there was an SVG equivalent though. Inkscape is alright but custom data parameters are really annoying to deal with, and ultimately the tool is built around drawing things to paper.

Hey, you should checkout https://github.com/rednblackgames/HyperLap2D then.

Re: Gamedev in Lisp. Part 2: Dungeons and Interfaces

#64

Post by dfxm12 »

maxwelljoslyn wrote: post #30

This is what all technical tutorials should look like. Well-composed and generally free of grammatical errors, spends just the right amount of time explaining each new topic as it is introduced, comes with full code samples, and includes visual samples of what the code does. Also, lengthy enough to treat the material in depth, while still being sufficiently self-contained that I can follow along -- without having rea…

Importantly, it's written, as opposed to a video. That's a huge plus already. You can copy and paste things, read things legibly, follow along at your own pace, consume it in silence, easily save a copy for offline use/archival (where you can also annotate it), easily search for things, etc.

Re: Gamedev in Lisp. Part 2: Dungeons and Interfaces

#65

Post by shawn_w »

BoingBoomTschak wrote: post #60
shawn_w wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Racket splits up the iteration forms from what to iterate over (sequences[1]). You can compose different sequence constructors together, or make brand new ones, without introducing new syntax. It has limited destructuring - sequences can return multiple values, all of which can be bound. There's an adapter to convert one that does that into returning a single list, but not the other way around. If there was it could…

Ah, I see, though I'd say it pollutes the function namespace a bit this way (as "in-x" semantically only makes sense in a loop) and missing on-list. Technically, you could do most of these in a few lines of CL too, but well, convenience is the point of these macros. Those seem to return sequences instead of streams/iterators, any idea why? Though it says "An in-list application can provide better performance for list…

Not so much macro magic, as not having to dispatch at runtime to the correct sequence constructor. (There is some magic if you use literals though).

Re: Gamedev in Lisp. Part 2: Dungeons and Interfaces

#66

Post by CyberDildonics »

medo-bear wrote: post #33
CyberDildonics wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why turning a simple loop into a 'mindbend' is considered good. The downfall of programming is complexity, if you're getting your mind blown by a loop how are you going to do the rest of the program?

Simple minds loop simply

I don't think this comment means anything or contains any information.

Re: Gamedev in Lisp. Part 2: Dungeons and Interfaces

#68

Post by CyberDildonics »

medo-bear wrote: post #67
CyberDildonics wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think this comment means anything or contains any information.

Colorless green ideas sleep furiously

This seems like you're replying with nonsense. Did you have anything coherent to say?
Post reply on HN