Topic: ILDA is over

[James]

LaserBoy does things that no other laser application has ever done.

The whole point of it is that it is totally original; not based on any other app or methodology and it is as much self contained and whole as possible.

It is open source, so I pride myself in solving all of it in my own code, that YOU can see!

It is a piece of art from its function to its form. Have you ever bothered to look at any of the code in a code editor?

It's also a gift.

If you don't like it the way it is, too bad!

You can't even see it well enough to know that it is most definitely NOT a DOS app. That shows me right there that you haven't given it a good ten seconds of consideration.

It is a high resolution graphics application that requires direct access to all or a portion of the video display. Everything you see inside that window is put there pixel-by-pixel from my own code. It just so happens that I use an 8x8 bitmap font that looks like a terminal font; also entirely in my own code. It is a terminal font! So what? You can read it and you can render it in different sizes to suit your display.

It is possible to run LaserBoy at The Linux Console, because from there you have everything; including the ability to take complete control of the video card and render directly into the display RAM.

You can also run it in Xfree86 and it looks and behaves exactly the same as it does anywhere else.

I think you are missing the biggest point of the whole thing. I had NO framework to start with. I wrote the whole thing, including ALL of the user interface. I did not just put together a bunch of preexisting objects that already worked in a ready-made application framework. And I did not rely on OpenGL or any other graphics rendering engines. It's all right there in that free code.

You probably haven't even looked at it long enough to figure out how to run it at any screen size. It isn't stuck at 640x480. That's just the default.

James. 

[Fanny Pack]

It's colorful.

[James]

yep.

James. 

[meandean]

 "...it is most definitely NOT a DOS app."

 Of course it's not. A DOS app allows you to retrieve a file from anywhere on your system, and if you're lucky, it may include mouse support to make the task easier. (yuk yuk yuk) It's not exactly a Windows app either,  because you can't change the window size without shutting the app down and restarting.

 Help me out here, I need a GOOD practical example of what makes fmt 3 so superior to 4 & 5 (other than the DISTANT possibility that it MIGHT be backwardly compatible with some old fmt 2 era app), and the notion that it's otherwise just a bunch of extra garbage to deal with.

[James]

Because format 3 is the logical last part needed to complete the set of 0, 1, 2 & 3. With ONLY these sections it is possible to have 2D or 3D frames (0 & 1) with no color and only blanking, or colors from an assumed palette of 63 colors or colors from defined palettes of up to 256 colors (2) AND (not or) color from tables of unique RGB values (3).

THAT'S IT. PROBLEM SOLVED.

This is a classic example of a closed set solution. There you have everything you need to define all of the relationships that consecutive frames of consecutive colored vertices can give you!

It's pure, clean math. It's all DONE.

It all works together.

NOT APART.

Think of it like a file system. It might not look like the most intuitive way to do it, but it makes the most sense.

Frames of vertices (0 & 1) have NO COLOR. They can exists and make sense totally apart from any color definitions.

Color is an enhancement to the concept of the frame; like an adjective to a noun.

Format 3 is just the unique RGB per vertex adjective that did not exists in previous documentation.

The concept of the frame (0 & 1) remains unchanged.

That's why format 3 is a genuine EXTENSION to the previous file format.

It's not a REPLACEMENT.

James. 

[meandean]

 "It's pure, clean math. It's all DONE."

  I still think it's a bunch of extra garbage with no payoff...

 You still have not answered my request-  I need a GOOD practical example of what makes fmt 3 so superior to 4 & 5.

[James]

You're not going to get one Dean.

It's in the form, not the practice.

It's the same reason I speak English and not Swahili.

There isn't one tiny speck of "extra garbage".

You have just convinced yourself that 4 & 5 are easier.

That's totally garbage!

James. 

[Fanny Pack]

I get it now.  It's like saying that the TRS-80 Model I system was better than the TRS-80 Model III system because you could add an expansion interface and some external floppys to make it a complete system instead of just replacing it.  I always did like my TRS-80 Model I system better than those new Model IIIs.  I had a lot of problems with the edge connectors for the cable between the keyboard and expansion interface but it was nothing that a pencil eraser every week or so wouldn't fix.
 
Why go with new technology when you can just keep on adding stuff to what you have?  Did anyone see Star Trek I where Voyager came back as VGER and had a big bunch of junk added to it and it was going to destroy everything?  That was cool.  More junk = cool.
 
I get Format 3 now.

[Fanny Pack]

Format 3 is better than Format 4/5 because with Format 3 you get to write out the header then a big array of coordinates.  Then you get to write out the header and the write out a bunch of colors.  That's cool because you get to do two loops instead of just one.  Computer programming is all about loops, so the more loops you can do, the better.  Also, it since the colors and coordinates are in seperate sections, there is that chance that the number of colors and number of coordinates might not match up or that there is a missing color section.  That makes it a lot more cool because there is more chance that a programmer that is not very good or someone who doesn't quite understand the format might mess up.  Then all the good programmers can laugh at him.  It's always cool to be a good programmer and laugh at people that don't get it.  If it was easy, everyone would do it, and then it wouldn't be cool anymore.  Kind of like tattoos.  Also, 3 is the next number after 2.  It's always cool to use the next number in a sequence instead of skipping one.  Going from 2 to 4 just isn't cool.  You could argue that in binary, 0 == 00 and 4 = 100 ans 1 = 01 and 5 == 101 and that last bits are the same.  But, that isn't as cool as going from 2 to 3.  Format 3 is also better because everyone likes it and has decided to add it to their applications.  10,000 programmers can't be wrong.  Format 3 is IT!  I could probably go on all day about how good and cool Forma 3 is but I need to go somewhere now.

[James]

Yawn..........

No you don't get it now....... or ever.

0, 1, 2 & 3 make a complete set.

4 & 5 replace that completely.

4 & 5 are NOT a logical part of 0, 1, 2 & 3.

4 & 5 have no reason to follow the form of 0, 1, 2 & 3 in any way.

And yet.... they are stuck with the same limitations of the 32-byte section header.

You STILL can not reliably skip over them because they don't tell you their actual size; only their element count.

4 & 5 could have fixed that problem and moved on WITH A NEW FILE EXTENSION;

like .il2 or something.

THAT WAS STUPID!

You just ca't see it because you refuse to do so.

James. 

[meandean]

 If fmt 4&5 are so stupid, why do you support them in LB?

[Fanny Pack]

No you don't get it now....... or ever.

I don't get your way of thinking.  That is correct.
 

0, 1, 2 & 3 make a complete set.

0 is 3 coordinate indexed color. 
1 is 2 coordinate indexed color.
2 provides an override of the default colors for 0 & 1.
3 provides the coordinates and the colors.
To me, it seems to me that 0, 1, & 2 are a complete set and Format 3 just replaces them. 
 

4 & 5 replace that completely.

No more than Format 3 does.  But since when is that a problem?  Format 3, 4, 5 all do the same thing.  Formats 4 & 5 just do it in a more straightforward and easier to implement way.

4 & 5 are NOT a logical part of 0, 1, 2 & 3.

0,1,2, & 3 are ways of representing colored points.
4 & 5 are ways of representing colored points.  4 & 5 are almost the exact same structure as 0 & 1.
I say that Format 4 & 5 is very much a logical part of it all.

4 & 5 have no reason to follow the form of 0, 1, 2 & 3 in any way.

Really?  Because of how Format 4 & 5 were structured I was able to add support for them with only a few lines of code.  That's all it took to add full color support.  On the other hand, to add support for 3 I had to jump through some hoops and add some error checking that isn't required for 0,1,2,4,5.  The form of 4 & 5 make complete sense in terms of retrofitting a program that already supports 0, 1, 2.
 

And yet.... they are stuck with the same limitations of the 32-byte section header.

To be backwards compatible.  And it worked.  I have proven that by implementation.
 

You STILL can not reliably skip over them because they don't tell you their actual size; only their element count.

Most Format 4 or 5 files will only have format 4 or 5 in them.  So, there is no reason to skip them.  If a header with a format 4 or 5 code is detected and if it isn't a recognized code then the file should just be closed.  If the application was made to skip formats it didn't recognize (which most weren't), it will simply parse all the way to the end looking for other format headers.  It isn't perfect but it is no less perfect than any of the others.  The only real problem that exists is when someone implements a format differently than the spec like you did.  In your case, even when the format code IS detected and recognized, you still can't read it.  That's pretty stupid.

4 & 5 could have fixed that problem and moved on WITH A NEW FILE EXTENSION;

like .il2 or something.

No reason for that.  The header file tells what it is and how to handle it.  The ILD extension tells the application that some variant of an ILDA file is enclosed.  The header tells exactly what it is.  A different extension would not solve anything because the application would still have to open it to see what is in the file.  What difference does it make if the decision tree starts with a file extension or a format code?   Not much.  Good applications only use file extensions for quick and dirty filtering but allow the application to attempt to open any file with an extension.  The contents of the file tell what the file is.  In your case, you have the imposter Format 3 format so it makes sense to use a different file extension.  Otherwise, there is no way for the application or user to know it isn't what it appears to be until an error condition occurs.
 
If you follow the spirit of the ILDA format, everything makes sense.  If you want to put your own spin on it then maybe it doesn't.  If you follow the spirit of the human race as a species, opposite sex mating makes sense.  If you want to put your own spin on it, maybe it doesn't.

[BlinkenLights]

Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up !  EVERYONE ! ! ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! THIS IS A STUPID CONVERSATION ! ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! IM TIRED OF READING IT ! ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up ! Shut up !

[James]

No shit.

[Fanny Pack]

Too funny.  The reason James left and was subsequently kicked off of PL was because he was told to shut up about ILDA/Format 3.  He got all mad and left because he refused to be a part of a place where he couldn't express himself freely.  Now, on the LaserBoy forum, we're told to shut up about ILDA/Format 3.  Do you realize how awesome that is?  My work here is done.  Ta!