Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

CS3 has found another way to piss me off. Whenever I compile my movie it ignores all the Actionscript (3), when I try to debug it says it can't debug because there is no actionscript in the .swf file. Anyone have a solution for that?

At 9/5/09 07:10 AM, Xeptic wrote: CS3 has found another way to piss me off. Whenever I compile my movie it ignores all the Actionscript (3), when I try to debug it says it can't debug because there is no actionscript in the .swf file. Anyone have a solution for that?

It's happened to me twice. It only seems to do it at the start of a project if you try to use too many classes (because it's not like AS3 is an OOP language or anything), and I've not found any solution.

Yuck, so now what am I going to do...

At 9/5/09 07:24 AM, Xeptic wrote: Yuck, so now what am I going to do...

I guess just start a new file and recycle all of your non-classes :/

At 9/5/09 07:25 AM, Paranoia wrote: I guess just start a new file and recycle all of your non-classes

That's hardly statisfactory... I seem to have found a different solution, apparently my library contains one or more corrupted items. I think I found the corrupted library item, now I have to restore it somehow and see if that solves my problems.

This will be my last post on this page, I promise. Just wanted to say that I found my problem... I typed:

TweenMax.to(mountainLightingIce, 30, {alpha:0.1.5});

Instead of:

TweenMax.to(mountainLightingIce, 30, {alpha:0.15});

So yeah, apparently that typo almost made me kill myself. I wish Flash had just given me an error message. This is the last project that I program with Flash.

At 9/5/09 04:02 AM, Deadclever23 wrote:

At 9/5/09 03:14 AM, angryglacier wrote:

At 9/5/09 02:59 AM, Glaiel-Gamer wrote: in game screencap

Oh yeah and your game crashed in the middle of pax what made it do that?

I thought you said it ran perfectly on your own OS, Glaiel?

I dunno what's going on. The game doesnt crash, their monitor and my computer don't get along

Hey guys, just put together a quick trailer for my new game with LongAnimals for FGL, let me know what you think! The game has 54 levels, lots and lots of different things to play with :)

Bubble Guinea Pop Trailer

At 9/5/09 12:47 PM, Jimp wrote: Bubble Guinea Pop Trailer

It's private :C

At 9/5/09 12:52 PM, zrb wrote: It's private :C

Fail. Try now :)

Omg! This looks amazingly fun, can't wait to play it :)

Looks like fun, although from the trailer I can't say for sure what the game is about. Obviously trying to hit certain objects with bubblegum, but I'm not sure why or how.

9 review

Went to see 9 last night, not gonna lie guys, don't get your hopes up. The movie is entertaining... but its 60 minutes long, and alot of stuff happens. its like "Lets go here DONE! Lets do this DONE! Now were here DONE! Oh look its over CREDITS!

The action is still cool though, it just needs better pacing.

You know how you know when you have a really good idea?
When somebody else has the same one.

For a while I've wanted to name a game
I've been working on for a bit "Moxie", but I think
I'll have to change it due to the word's recent popping out of nowhere...

It was traditionally a soda,
then on G4 one day it was an online interviewee's nickname,
I ran into it again in the most recent Night at the Museum movie,
and finally as I was watching Spongebob today, I saw
an ad for some barbie doll group called Moxie Girlz.

I had never heard of the word before when I
named it earlier this year. I named it that after seeing it as
a search result of the word "bravery" on thesaurus.com.

I love the name, but,
I certainly don't want to run into any Tim Langdells.
:[

At 9/5/09 05:40 PM, K-Guare wrote: You know how you know when you have a really good idea?
When somebody else has the same one.

For a while I've wanted to name a game
I've been working on for a bit "Moxie", but I think
I'll have to change it due to the word's recent popping out of nowhere...

Moxies is a restaurant, its been around forever :)

At 9/5/09 04:46 PM, Duchednier wrote: Went to see 9 last night, not gonna lie guys, don't get your hopes up. The movie is entertaining... but its 60 minutes long, and alot of stuff happens. its like "Lets go here DONE! Lets do this DONE! Now were here DONE! Oh look its over CREDITS!

Wait, isn't it supposed to come out on 9/9/09?

At 9/5/09 06:09 PM, Duchednier wrote: Moxies is a restaurant, its been around forever :)

Well no wonder I haven't heard of it. :]

Hello everyone :)

I'm gonna start animating again, but I lost my tablet pen. I'll try to find it eventually..... Who wants to send me a replacementttt? :)

At 9/5/09 07:34 PM, K-Guare wrote:

At 9/5/09 06:09 PM, Duchednier wrote: Moxies is a restaurant, its been around forever :)

Well no wonder I haven't heard of it. :]

We're practically on opposite sides of the country

At 9/5/09 08:12 PM, Magical-Zorse wrote: We're practically on opposite sides of the country

Well now it seems I now have two reasons to
be a little sad about not living closer to the other corner of the states.

The other reason is PAX, lol.

Speed Test
For loop verse while loop.

For loop:

for(var i:int = 0; i < 1000000000; i++)
{
}

Results:

6956
6779
6830

average = 6855

While loop:

var i:int = 0;
while ( i < 1000000000)
{
     i++
}

Results:

6826
6777
6798

average = 6800.333

Strange indeed. The while loop is slightly faster than the for.

At 9/6/09 04:08 AM, Deadclever23 wrote: Strange indeed. The while loop is slightly faster than the for.

Crazy Flash.
Y'know what's even faster than them, though? Do..while is faster than both, and for..in is even faster (although, there are less opportunities to use for..in)!
Or, at least I think that's the usual case in AS2; I've never tested it myself.

However, it looks like it depends a lot on what you are doing in the loop. Take a look at this. And if it looks like I don't know what I'm talking about, I probably don't.

At 9/5/09 11:39 AM, Glaiel-Gamer wrote:

At 9/5/09 04:02 AM, Deadclever23 wrote:

At 9/5/09 03:14 AM, angryglacier wrote:

At 9/5/09 02:59 AM, Glaiel-Gamer wrote: in game screencap

Oh yeah and your game crashed in the middle of pax what made it do that?

I thought you said it ran perfectly on your own OS, Glaiel?

I dunno what's going on. The game doesnt crash, their monitor and my computer don't get along

The AV guy brought us a new cable today. Game has not hiccuped since, so it was the cable after all.

Your speed test is quite simply, not true. There is absolutely no difference at all between your two loops, not even in bytecode, they produce (even under flash's shitty compiler) the exact same bytecode.

More likely, it is a result of running the swf inside of flash, forcing debug mode even if the swf isn't compiled for debugging, and the extra time is spent on processing an extra line of code.

Whats up with the featured art section then? :D

cocks

At 9/6/09 04:08 AM, Deadclever23 wrote: Speed Test
For loop verse while loop.

For loop:

for(var i:int = 0; i < 1000000000; i++)
{
}

Results:

6956
6779
6830

average = 6855

While loop:

var i:int = 0;
while ( i < 1000000000)
{
i++
}

Results:

6826
6777
6798

average = 6800.333

Strange indeed. The while loop is slightly faster than the for.

Numbers don't mean anything without units. What's 6826? 6826 milliseconds? There doesn't even seem to be any significant difference between the average for both loops. 6855/6800 is 1.008, a difference so negligible that even some of the values within the same type of loop vary more, like 6826 and 6777. This clearly suggests that whatever difference there is between the two types of loops is purely coincidental due to the random factors that could affect your result. I don't know about these small technical events in great depth, but I assume that things such as your CPU doing a little bit more work during one of the tests for background programs could affect the result by a tiny bit, or maybe it can be physical conditions related to your hardware. I cannot answer with certainty what exactly causes those variations in your values, but it seems pretty obvious that whatever the difference may be, it is not in structure of your code. I would expect the same results if you were to replace the while loop by a for loop (thus comparing for to itself, showing it to be impossible that the difference is in code structure)

Moreover, I find it absurd that each of your values contains 4 significant numbers, yet the average contains 7. When handling values of limited precision, all operations done to them must yield a number with the same amount of significant numbers, or else the result is flawed in the sense that you added imaginary numbers that were not included. (ie: 6777.000 insteado f 6777)

At 9/6/09 07:37 AM, Jimp wrote: Whats up with the featured art section then? :D

cocks

Egoraptor and Canas got phished by www.nevvgrounds.com ('w' was replaced by two 'v's) apparantly.
People were descouted, but that's about it.
Thread

At 9/6/09 07:48 AM, Toast wrote: There doesn't even seem to be any significant difference between the average for both loops. 6855/6800 is 1.008, a difference so negligible that even some of the values within the same type of loop vary more, like 6826 and 6777.

Exactly. Fuck the fourth significant figure :p

So long as we're on the subject of coding, does anyone know the best way of shuffling an array in Flash? Not that it makes too much of a difference in this particular case, but shuffling always throws up some interesting solutions.

At 9/6/09 08:19 AM, Paranoia wrote: So long as we're on the subject of coding, does anyone know the best way of shuffling an array in Flash? Not that it makes too much of a difference in this particular case, but shuffling always throws up some interesting solutions.

First I thought you could assign a random number to each value and then sort the values depending on their random number, but that would be inefficient since no sorting algorithms can sort a list in linear time. here's what i managed to do in linear time:

import random
import math

def shuffle(a):
    n = len(a)
    l = []
    while(n>0):
        rng = int(math.floor(random.random()*n))
        l.append(a[rng])
        a.pop(rng)
        n -= 1
    return l

I wrote it in python but it's easy to understand even if you're not fluent with the language. It simply creates a new empty array and chooses a random value from the first array, inserts it to the second array, and removes it from the first array. It takes exactly n steps to shuffle a list of n values

(def = function, len = length, append = push)

I'm back baby(s).

Speed Tests

Surely any pc that can run vista can afford the extra few milleseconds to process what you want. In C++ and proper engine coding it would be a vast chasm, but with flash it is not even an inconvenience to the player.

I agree optimization is vital, but shaving thousands of seconds off will not make your game any better.

Fastest Coding Language

On the topic of SPEEEEEED, what is the fastest (as in runtime computation) language? I've heard F# is near the top, but apparently C++ is better at rendering in real time. I've set a target to learn a proper programming language (ie. C++/C#) by christmas, and was just wondering what are the pros/cons of them.

Also, what i miss?