Notch trying jsFiddle

Post by look_lookatme » Mon, Dec 03, 2012, 6:52 AM UTC

alexhaefner wrote: post #90

antirez wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No I really mean low level :-) Javascript is high level, but here notch is using it as a low level framebuffer.

I respectfully disagree with your use of low level, though I do understand your analogy about the pixelbuffer being like a frame buffer. But he's actually using Javascript arrays which can get passed around inside a javascript VM, and do not have a set size. Not very "low level". I spent a moment and changed the arrays to Float32Arrays which have set sizes and sit in memory without being fucked with by the VM and spe…

Post by joelthelion » Mon, Dec 03, 2012, 8:06 AM UTC

antirez wrote: post #23

JoeCortopassi wrote: post #21

Such a great example of what can be done in javascript/canvas. As it is, I was completely blown away by how little code it actually took to do that. My only gripe would be, why couldn't he have used descriptive variable names, so I can better go through and understand it? :-)

This code uses zero canvas / javascript specific functions. It is using basic trigonometric functions and is using canvas only to write RGB pixels. Canvas are much more powerful and high level than that, but this is not a good example as Notch just needed to set pixels.

Post by tlrobinson » Mon, Dec 03, 2012, 8:37 AM UTC

antirez wrote: post #23

JoeCortopassi wrote: post #21

Such a great example of what can be done in javascript/canvas. As it is, I was completely blown away by how little code it actually took to do that. My only gripe would be, why couldn't he have used descriptive variable names, so I can better go through and understand it? :-)

This code uses zero canvas / javascript specific functions. It is using basic trigonometric functions and is using canvas only to write RGB pixels. Canvas are much more powerful and high level than that, but this is not a good example as Notch just needed to set pixels.

Post by prawn » Mon, Dec 03, 2012, 8:58 AM UTC

Post by akx » Mon, Dec 03, 2012, 9:06 AM UTC

scottyallen wrote: post #52

undergroundhero wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the livecoding link. I assume there's some overhead in constantly checking for and applying code changes - that's probably the reason for the lower frame rate.

Good point, I hadn't thought about the fact they might be polling for changes. Might be better if livecoding used an event based model to check for updates...