[FP] - FPS

[beforelast]

Herei s my final project. Not hte best but I like it

[Delos]

Pleaes provide a little more info in your description regarding your proggie - i.e., what language it was written in, some relevant background info, perhaps some screenies - just so people know what they're downloading.

[Windsurfer]

Nice Whak-a-mole game... but i was wondering if you could fork the sound effects to make it run smoothly. And maybe make the enemies appear faster from the begining? Otherwise, nice graphics. I really think you should do some sort of description for this game.

[upthescale]

Nice game man, good graphics. Get a voting poll, so i can vote awsome!

[the_short1]

Windsrufer wrote:

Nice Whak-a-mole game... but i was wondering if you could fork the sound effects

forking would be a bad idea, its very inneficient... upgrade to turing 4.0.5 and use Music.PlayFileReturn it plays a sound file while continueing a program.

good job otherwise, not very buggy like most of the other submissions.

[Windsurfer]

the_short1 wrote:

forking would be a bad idea, its very inneficient... upgrade to turing 4.0.5 and use Music.PlayFileReturn it plays a sound file while continueing a program.

Using Music.PlayFileReturn actually just calls a procedure that forks the sound for you, so you don't have to mess with making processes and the such.

code:

process Play_String (this : string)     Music.PlayFile (this) end Play_String procedure Play_Music (this : string)     fork Play_String (this) end Play_Music

Using the above code, calling Play_Music("sound.wav") will actually do the exact same thing (even performance wise) as calling Music.PlayFileReturn("sound.wav").
Actually, after testing a bit, the code above seems to perform slightly faster than Turing's built-in Music.PlayFileReturn... hmm...

[Delos]

Windsrufer wrote:

Actually, after testing a bit, the code above seems to perform slightly faster than Turing's built-in Music.PlayFileReturn... hmm...

What do you mean by testing? Did you run a few times and compare some sample times? Keep in mind random variance - unaccountable noise. I would suggest running at least 30 trials on each before making any calls, but that's just me being statistically nitpicky .

If you're wondering why I chose the number 30, it's quite simple. Basic stats can show that when n=30, from even somewhat skewed populations, one can get a sufficiently normal distribution upon which many statistical methods may be applied. Sure taking a mean is nothing intense, but if you did want to do any form of hypothesis testing (as you're thought-line indicates) you'd want to make sure your sample sizes are large enough and that you have a large enough n (i.e., enough Power!).

[the_short1]

really.. thats .. . sad... .i used it in my pacman game wayy back when and i thought it improved the performance.... lol delos.. thats king..

[Windsurfer]

Delos wrote:

What do you mean by testing? Did you run a few times and compare some sample times?

If you must know, Delos, I used a slightly modified version of my timing program found http://www.compsci.ca/v2/viewtopic.php?t=12502 except i tested it 100 times. For the particular sound i was playing, Turing got about 890, while my procedure got about 840. Of course, there was a lot of variance, but it was almost my own procedure that "won".

[[Gandalf]]

Turing is far from great when it comes to any efficiency test. There is always some arbitrary timing that skews the results. Take the following program for example:

code:

var timeA, timeB : int var tempDist : real var beginTime : int := Time.Elapsed for i : 1 .. 10000     tempDist := Math.Distance (1, 1, 5, 5) end for timeA := Time.Elapsed - beginTime beginTime := Time.Elapsed for i : 1 .. 10000     tempDist := Math.Distance (1, 1, 5, 5) end for timeB := Time.Elapsed - beginTime put "Time A: ", timeA, "\nTime B: ", timeB

One would think that the times outputted are either always equal or else that sometimes one takes a bit longer, and sometimes the other (about 50-50). Such is not the case. About 99% of the time the first test takes longer than or equal to the second:

code:

var beginTime : int var timeA, timeB : array 1 .. 100 of int var tempDist : real for z : 1 .. 100     beginTime := Time.Elapsed     for i : 1 .. 10000         tempDist := Math.Distance (1, 1, 5, 5)     end for     timeA (z) := Time.Elapsed - beginTime     beginTime := Time.Elapsed     for i : 1 .. 10000         tempDist := Math.Distance (1, 1, 5, 5)     end for     timeB (z) := Time.Elapsed - beginTime end for put "Test finished..." var timeALonger, timeBLonger, timesEqual : int := 0 for i : 1 .. upper (timeA)     if timeA (i) > timeB (i) then         timeALonger += 1     elsif timeB (i) > timeB (i) then         timeBLonger += 1     else         timesEqual += 1     end if end for put "Time A longer: ", timeALonger / upper (timeA) * 100, "%" put "Time B longer: ", timeBLonger / upper (timeB) * 100, "%" put "Times equal: ", timesEqual / upper (timeA) * 100, "%"

[NikG]

Turing:

Test finished... Time A longer: 42% Time B longer: 0% Times equal: 58%

Wow, that really makes me scratch my head.