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

Let's compile Quake like it's 1997

fabiensanglard.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 82 posts

Re: Let's compile Quake like it's 1997

#61

Post by p0w3n3d »

kristopolous wrote: post #3

"VC++6 is remarkably powerful for 1996. It has features such as "Go to definition", breakpoints, stacktrace, and variable inspections (but no Intellisense auto-completion yet). I never used it but it must have felt like a dream at the time." And here we are, in a generation of people writing blogs that never used VS6. I am now officially old. I was still using VS6 as late as 2009 btw...also it's from 1998. If you mad…

Still young people who have perseverance to load up old windows and VC deserve kudos

Re: Let's compile Quake like it's 1997

#62

Post by nurettin »

And it was so much better/more stable than Borland C++6! Open/close 15-30 files or mistype a path and borland gave you the good old crash. You had to handle that IDE with extreme care. You'd develop a feeling for its quirks and sometimes it would work for hours without crashing.

Re: Let's compile Quake like it's 1997

#63

Post by pjmlp »

zelphirkalt wrote: post #44
kristopolous wrote: post #3

"VC++6 is remarkably powerful for 1996. It has features such as "Go to definition", breakpoints, stacktrace, and variable inspections (but no Intellisense auto-completion yet). I never used it but it must have felt like a dream at the time." And here we are, in a generation of people writing blogs that never used VS6. I am now officially old. I was still using VS6 as late as 2009 btw...also it's from 1998. If you mad…

Didn't Smalltalk environments have those features ages ago already?

It did, as did other Xerox systems, Interlisp-D, XDE and Cedar.

Re: Let's compile Quake like it's 1997

#64

Post by kristopolous »

pjmlp wrote: post #36
kristopolous wrote: post #3

"VC++6 is remarkably powerful for 1996. It has features such as "Go to definition", breakpoints, stacktrace, and variable inspections (but no Intellisense auto-completion yet). I never used it but it must have felt like a dream at the time." And here we are, in a generation of people writing blogs that never used VS6. I am now officially old. I was still using VS6 as late as 2009 btw...also it's from 1998. If you mad…

Many of those features were already available in MS-DOS and Windows 3.x IDEs from Borland for Turbo Pascal and C++. Which is why when I got into UNIX development felt like going into the stone age of development tools, thankfully XEmacs was already there. Which by the way, it was born for Energize C++, in 1993! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQQTScuApWk Also here is what NeXTSTEP development environment looked like,…

The appeal of the cli/tui is because agents can use them better and because people want to ssh in and just use something without any fuss or lag

And I know the hn reply, it's "what do you mean? all you have to do is this other thing over here" and that's the point ... people don't want to. So they don't.

Re: Let's compile Quake like it's 1997

#65

Post by Sarkie »

gryson wrote: post #7
kristopolous wrote: post #3

"VC++6 is remarkably powerful for 1996. It has features such as "Go to definition", breakpoints, stacktrace, and variable inspections (but no Intellisense auto-completion yet). I never used it but it must have felt like a dream at the time." And here we are, in a generation of people writing blogs that never used VS6. I am now officially old. I was still using VS6 as late as 2009 btw...also it's from 1998. If you mad…

You make it sound like he's some young'un, but Fabien has been programming since 1983. https://fabiensanglard.net/40/

Exactly but writing to serve his audience

Re: Let's compile Quake like it's 1997

#66

Post by orionblastar »

ogurechny wrote: post #23
orionblastar wrote: post #2

If you want to play Quake for free on Windows 11, try this: https://quake-remake.en.uptodown.com/windows/download

There is a dozen of existing Quake ports ready to run the moment you feed them the game files, and you recommend a version re-implemented on top of Xash3D, which is a GoldSrc-compatible engine. Why?

It was the first result in a Google Search for "Quake".

Re: Let's compile Quake like it's 1997

#67

Post by fragmede »

tosti wrote: post #51
bityard wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the timeline I remember, Microsoft and Windows were routinely criticized for producing bloated and buggy systems. Especially from those who previously used an Amiga or Mac. A new version of Windows inevitably meant buying a whole new computer, along with upgrading the memory midway through it's 3-4 year lifespan.

A friend of mine installed MS-Windows 95 on a 386 and Weird Al Yankovic nailed it: But my machine, it's obsolete. It takes an hour just to bring up the screen!

https://youtu.be/Obt4rI7Dhbo

That's a throwback.

Re: Let's compile Quake like it's 1997

#69

Post by imron »

galangalalgol wrote: post #54
kristopolous wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That wasn't the banger for vs6 it was the workflow and muscle memory of the thing. The flow is still unmatched IMHO. It was like avid or photoshop for writing windows software. Default keys in modern IDEs are basically still the vs assignments from the 5/6 era. It was the closest Microsoft ever came to making their own emacs or vim. vs6 was like 90% of my screen time as a windows dev in the 90s and 2000s I've been a…

I find vscode with the right plugins better than vs6 was by a long shot. Helix is pretty amazing too.

The debugger doesn’t even come close

Re: Let's compile Quake like it's 1997

#70

Post by nubinetwork »

jandrese wrote: post #41

> DO NOT get it from github or transfer the files via FTP. I bet the author doesn't know about FTP's ASCII mode, and especially doesn't know that it is the default. ASCII mode was a nifty feature, but it never should have been the default. Especially when you consider that most text files are small and easy to re-download if you forget, while binary files are often quite large and the damage done by the line ending c…

If it's not that, it's older Windows not having unicode support, or Unix vs Windows line feeds...
Post reply on HN