My procrastination meant I finished but two games for the seventh Octo Jam, the same amount I finished last year, but these were more complex and more fun than last year's, so at least I managed those. Documenting these are amongst my current latest articles. I also wrote an article reflecting on this Octo Jam and what I did, including how I came across a rare flaw when using mine MMC, which has made me realize that an alternative internal representation I've before considered is the only reasonable option.
Whilst rewriting the CHIP-8 targeting again would be best, I'm too tired for that, and instead will simply hunt down the flaw and correct it. My future targetings will use this new, higher-level internal representation, and be better for it. Before I move to a real machine code, I'm considering either the LMC or MIX as the next targeting, as these have qualities which make them particularly nice for such experimentation, and I've also given a great deal of thought to the interface I want to present for an accumulator machine, which will be fun.
I'll pursue this in tandem with adding more commands to the CHIP-8 targeting. The large amount of pure machine code available for CHIP-8 that I've documented left me wanting for an easy means to associate names without the possibility of making a mistake, and I've envisioned a command enabling this:
The command will accept a name, and scan the program space for instructions supporting such an association and having an equivalent value; so, I'd be able to name an address with a label and then tell it to search out associations, and it would only seek out the XYYY instructions, 0XXX, 1XXX, 2XXX, AXXX, and BXXX.
This is a command I'd wanted in the old implementation, but was going to be too difficult to add. I expect to use a newer reimplementation of the MMC targeted at CHIP-8 in the next Octo Jam. To anyone who cares to watch it, the after-jam Octo Jam stream can be viewed here; it's shorter than those preceding it:
https://invidious.snopyta.org/XIN3hi85IoE
If you're going to go against modern computing, you should at least have something interesting to say instead of just shallow and derogatory shit
I don't think I'm boring. I strive to consider and reach novel solutions to problems, rather than merely doing the same as others are content to. Rather than claim we should respect all language encodings, or that we should just make everything UTF-8 Unicode because awful systems can't cope with more than one system encoding, I recognize both options are horrible, and that storing text as character streams is stupid; this is what mine Elision system will be.
Rust is the effeminate man's Ada
That's based on simple observation, and I stand by it. It may be found amusing I was even impotently threatened by someone for this joke over IRC, a long ways back.
It sickens me when people genuinely believe Rust is somehow the first programming language to make safety a goal, when it doesn't even do that. Articles from groups which should, and do, know better imply this, and they do this maliciously. It's similar to how articles will mention ``open source'', and always avoid mentioning Free Software, because just the thought someone may grow curious and look is dangerous to the agenda. My one hundredth article, 2020-09-24, is about this lack of knowledge regarding computing history, with people believing whatever lies fools will tell them, and it's very disconcerting.
It's no wonder he wasn't liked on HN, because he would just bloviate about his favourite hipster languages with no actual substance.
I've learned that Hacker News and Lobsters aren't venues for substantive conversations. They don't last long, names encourage people mentioning irrelevant posting history, and, worst of all, most conversations in these link aggregators involve what others are doing elsewhere. A forum such as this supports long conversations, without names, and about people actually doing things, which is in heavy contrast.
It's akin to the differences between creators and mere fanatics.
Hate to doublepost, but I should also add that this is why people should generally stay anonymous.
I'm often anonymous, but it was rather inevitable I was going to grow that identity I'd fostered into something more. It's a shame that I could've tarnished the Lisp General at all, but expanding this identity beyond Lisp has generally lead to better things.
>>57
I see this manner of reaction as that more common towards what I've done with the identity, and I'll also add that it's nice to read someone enjoys reading my work.