Renegade
18.07.2010, 20:16:02
Fight 1
Not much of a contest here, since I share Beowulf's assessment that it'd take a shitload of work to get #708 to work, and, more importantly, I find reaperrr's question of whether anyone can actually guarantee it'll make a difference very valid.
Alex said it well: While it is a good idea to actually use the power of the entire processor, multi-threading will never be able to overcome shitty design.
There's no proof #708 will lead to a performance improvement that warrants the work invested into it, and the work that would have to be invested is enormous.
Therefore,
Kill #708
Support #404 Feature not found?
Fight 2
Yeah...#947 is one of pd's drive-by additions. He has worked on it, there is code checked in, but I have no idea what state it is in.
While I would, on principle, be inclined to say "we already have that partially coded, no point in suspending it now", I have to admit, Blade's point is concerning me...between all the happy crying for features and the support, has anyone actually thought about how to work with these new theaters?
I don't know how FA2's support for additional theaters is...I suspect non-existent. And the only other way I can come up with right now to create a map in a new theater would be setting it up exactly like an old one, create the map in, say, temperate, and then manually switch the map over to the new theater outside of FA2.
Possible, but not exactly elegant, and a rather huge flaw in this concept.
Add to that MRMIdAS's objection that removing theaters would lead to incompatibility with a large number of existing maps, both stock and custom, and, existing code or not, while the feature itself sounds neat, it just doesn't seem to fit into the environment.
On the other hand, just as Alex said, the first thing I thought when I saw the VeteranAmmo thing was "wouldn't that make more sense on the weapon?". If #316 survives, it should be able to emulate #334 just fine, and on its own, #334 sounds rather weak, especially compared to new theaters.
So, while I do think there are severe flaws in 947's concept, I simply don't think #334 is strong enough of an issue to kill #947 for, especially considering it's supposedly already half-coded.
Kill #334
Support #947
Not much of a contest here, since I share Beowulf's assessment that it'd take a shitload of work to get #708 to work, and, more importantly, I find reaperrr's question of whether anyone can actually guarantee it'll make a difference very valid.
Alex said it well: While it is a good idea to actually use the power of the entire processor, multi-threading will never be able to overcome shitty design.
There's no proof #708 will lead to a performance improvement that warrants the work invested into it, and the work that would have to be invested is enormous.
Therefore,
Kill #708
Support #404 Feature not found?
Fight 2
Yeah...#947 is one of pd's drive-by additions. He has worked on it, there is code checked in, but I have no idea what state it is in.
While I would, on principle, be inclined to say "we already have that partially coded, no point in suspending it now", I have to admit, Blade's point is concerning me...between all the happy crying for features and the support, has anyone actually thought about how to work with these new theaters?
I don't know how FA2's support for additional theaters is...I suspect non-existent. And the only other way I can come up with right now to create a map in a new theater would be setting it up exactly like an old one, create the map in, say, temperate, and then manually switch the map over to the new theater outside of FA2.
Possible, but not exactly elegant, and a rather huge flaw in this concept.
Add to that MRMIdAS's objection that removing theaters would lead to incompatibility with a large number of existing maps, both stock and custom, and, existing code or not, while the feature itself sounds neat, it just doesn't seem to fit into the environment.
On the other hand, just as Alex said, the first thing I thought when I saw the VeteranAmmo thing was "wouldn't that make more sense on the weapon?". If #316 survives, it should be able to emulate #334 just fine, and on its own, #334 sounds rather weak, especially compared to new theaters.
So, while I do think there are severe flaws in 947's concept, I simply don't think #334 is strong enough of an issue to kill #947 for, especially considering it's supposedly already half-coded.
Kill #334
Support #947
Forum Rules
(01.06.2011, 05:43:25)kenosis Wrote: Oh damn don't be disgraced again!
(25.06.2011, 20:42:59)Nighthawk Wrote: The proverbial bearded omni-bug may be dead, but the containment campaign is still being waged in the desert.