Live data from Hacker News

Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

github.com

231–240 of 302 posts

Re: Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

#231
post #209
post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is probably fine, it is kind of a best case scenario: porting a good code base with lots of unit tests, all hand-written. Not much can go wrong here as the LLM is kept in check by the original code, the tests, and the fact that the topic (a JS engine) is well documented. The problem is what comes next. They now have code that they don't understand, and they are likely to work on it with AI in the future, but the n…

It’s always been a fallacy to think that large organizations have code which is understood. There are people somewhere understanding small parts up until the next round of layoffs.

Millions were invested in this project where they fired the expensive experts (me included) and replaced with a small army of cheap devs (which was actually more expensive and less productive than just retaining even one of the experts would have been). Couple years later the inevitable happened and the whole thing was thrown into trash. Code without anyone who understands it is just a liability.

Re: Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

#232
post #128
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people, myself included, think that announcing a conversion from Rust to Zig as an experiment then jumping to putting it in the alpha train for public testing/consumption without any real explanation in the span of around 2 weeks is irresponsible and reckless. Blogposts were promised, details were hinted, but no, it’s just full steam ahead because the AI worked so well. The converted unit tests all worked, all t…

How about testing the output? Seems like the ultimate test. If the output's still good, I guess the rewrite didn't hurt.

Testing can expose errors, but it can’t prove correctness.

Re: Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

#233
post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think this port is related to tour point; The source code for Command and Conquer generals (and other C&C games) was released a while back. This port uses that source code. So this port is not based on reverse engineering. The port even states someone else (manually) already did the hard work of porting it to macOS and Linux (so not an LLM): > Built on EA's GPL v3 source release via fbraz3/GeneralsX (which did…

Then the title is incorrect. Generals has been on the macOS App Store for years.

> Then the title is incorrect. Generals has been on the macOS App Store for years.

Neither the HN submission or GitHub repository says it's first or novel though? Just that it's (another) port of it?

Re: Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

#234
post #197

No one seems to be worried about the fact that a vibe-coded app or conversion or rewrite is not copyright-able. It is not a derivative, it's a machine translation, without a human author. So if that is released to the public, it's in the public domain, no license is applicable.

If they're using the same graphical assets they're violating copyright. Even if it's a reimagining of said assets it's probably still grounds for takedown.

Re: Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

#235

I vibe code myself to sleep and implemented a rewrite of civ1 in Common Lisp. It works well, has all the DOS nostalgia I wanted (uses the same sprites etc.) 10/10 will continue doing this kind of shit.

Kudos to you.

Every time I try to vibe code myself to sleep I blink once and it's 5am. Creating is too much fun.

Any tips?

Re: Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

#236
post #219

Does it actually play identically or is there going to be weird bugs all over the place? Seems like an impossible ask to verify if you don't have an immense test suite that covers everything.

The parent of the parent project has ground truth replays, which get compared to new PRs. The game uses lockstep networking, so this is required to prevent desyncs.

That sounds nowhere near adequate

Re: Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

#238

I think the next 10 years or so are going to see a chucklefuck of games reversed thanks to LLMs, which can easily pattern match and operate on contrivedely optimized assembly and output reasonably accurate C/C++ code. I’m one of many right now using Ghidra + LLM workflow. It’s doing the thing it needs to and I’ve helped several communities revive and port their games this way. It is a huge time saver. While I’d perso…

We are also going to get shovelware without end.

1983 will seem like nothing by comparison.

Re: Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

#240

I think the next 10 years or so are going to see a chucklefuck of games reversed thanks to LLMs, which can easily pattern match and operate on contrivedely optimized assembly and output reasonably accurate C/C++ code. I’m one of many right now using Ghidra + LLM workflow. It’s doing the thing it needs to and I’ve helped several communities revive and port their games this way. It is a huge time saver. While I’d perso…

The mild alarm for me is that this won't be limited to just games.

I've spent almost 30 years building applications for the web. I've been switching my attention to different models of distribution in part because I see a desire for people to not be paying monthly seat subscriptions, but also because it can simplify my own operations - I want to move to a solo indie dev model, and giving you an executable you run means you look after "operations", and I don't. Desktop applications in particular have the potential for you to integrate them with your agent workflows.

But if I put effort into building some secret sauce into an application, and there is then a risk that by distributing it, it gets reverse engineered and then rebuilt by competitors, malicious actors, whoever, there is now the same economic risk to software distribution as there is to DRM-free media distribution. As a result, I might just not do it.

Now, some people will argue software wants to be free - build on the F/LOSS economic model, this becomes less of an issue - but there isn't really a viable F/LOSS economic model for most developers.

Per seat monthly subscriptions with remote access seems like the way we need to be, then...

Post reply on HN