Is NH++ written in C++?
Bear Giles
implementation, please don't use the "++" suffix.
That is as inappropriate as calling it NHada or NHlisp -- the "++" suffix
is commonly understood to indicate either a C program _rewritten_ in C++
or a C utility which now supports C++ as well.
If you don't want to use a new patch level or usurp the 3.1 notation,
here are a few other suggestions:
NHtng -- NetHack: The Next Generation
NHer -- NetHacker, followed by NHest (NetHackest)
NH+S -- NetHack & Slash.
I'm sure you can come up with more! :-)
--
Bear Giles
be...@fsl.noaa.gov/cs.colorado.edu
Daniel DuBois
>Unless NH"++" is written in C++, preferably with a solid object-oriented
>implementation, please don't use the "++" suffix.
>That is as inappropriate as calling it NHada or NHlisp -- the "++" suffix
>is commonly understood to indicate either a C program _rewritten_ in C++
>or a C utility which now supports C++ as well.
>If you don't want to use a new patch level or usurp the 3.1 notation,
>here are a few other suggestions:
It's a little too late... The program is already 'in the field' being
called whatever it will be called for the rest of it's life. Kinda
silly to come down on the programmers like that complaining about
what the 'standard' naming convention should be. They wrote it,
they can call it whatever non-copywrited name they want.
In theory, practice and theory are the same, in practice, theory and
practice are different.
-Dan
Bear Giles
>be...@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU (Bear Giles) writes:
>
>>Unless NH"++" is written in C++, preferably with a solid object-oriented
>>implementation, please don't use the "++" suffix.
>
>>That is as inappropriate as calling it NHada or NHlisp -- the "++" suffix
>>is commonly understood to indicate either a C program _rewritten_ in C++
>>or a C utility which now supports C++ as well.
>
>called whatever it will be called for the rest of it's life.
It is still possible to change the name. You would need to refer to
the old name in FAQ lists for a few months, but that's a minor consideration.
>Kinda
>silly to come down on the programmers like that complaining about
>what the 'standard' naming convention should be. They wrote it,
>they can call it whatever non-copywrited name they want.
Have you ever read _Alice in Wonderland_, where one of the characters
insists that words mean only what he(?) says they mean? That is precisely
what you are saying!
Professional programmers are hired to _communicate_. There are very
few positions (and fewer every day) where a programmer can write code
any way s/he pleases as long as it works -- the primary concern is now
writing code that others can maintain.
For instance, "efficiency" certainly takes a back seat to clarity in 99%
of the situations. (You are expected to use good algorithms, rather than
compiler tricks, for performance).
If you want to write a program for your own use, you can do whatever
you want. If you are writing a program for others you are expected
to observe a large number of conventions; naming a non-C++ version of
program X "X++" violates several of them.
As some people have pointed out in e-mail, this is a free effort and
a number of professional considerations don't enter into it... but I
would presume the people involved will eventually seek employment in
the software industry. It's never too early to develop good habits.
>In theory, practice and theory are the same, in practice, theory and
>practice are different.
In practice, people who don't understand the theory are frequently worse
than useless.
(This isn't an exaggeration. I read an article a while back where the
authors concluded that some programmers actually have _negative_
productivity -- their changes introduce so many new bugs that more time
is spent removing those bugs than that person spent writing code).
--
Bear Giles
be...@fsl.noaa.gov/cs.colorado.edu
Daniel DuBois
>>It's a little too late... The program is already 'in the field' being
>>called whatever it will be called for the rest of it's life.
>It is still possible to change the name. You would need to refer to
>the old name in FAQ lists for a few months, but that's a minor consideration.
>>Kinda
>>silly to come down on the programmers like that complaining about
>>what the 'standard' naming convention should be. They wrote it,
>>they can call it whatever non-copywrited name they want.
>Professional programmers are hired to _communicate_. There are very
>few positions (and fewer every day) where a programmer can write code
>any way s/he pleases as long as it works -- the primary concern is now
>writing code that others can maintain.
He wasn't hired by anybody to write anything... He wrote this out
of the kindness of his heart. If someone else wants to maintain it,
that has nothing to do with the name of the program.
>For instance, "efficiency" certainly takes a back seat to clarity in 99%
>of the situations. (You are expected to use good algorithms, rather than
>compiler tricks, for performance).
Whats with this lecture on programming? This is rec.games.hack, no
one wants to hear your _opinions_ on the proper programming practices
here. How presumptious and arrogant. When you write a program you
can my it whatever the hell you want, ok? And if, heaven forbid, you
should get in a position of management and want to quiz prospective
employees on their knowledge of your personal programming conventions,
feel free.
>If you want to write a program for your own use, you can do whatever
>you want. If you are writing a program for others you are expected
>to observe a large number of conventions; naming a non-C++ version of
>program X "X++" violates several of them.
Expected by who? People like you who contribute nothing but complain
after the fact?
>As some people have pointed out in e-mail, this is a free effort and
>a number of professional considerations don't enter into it... but I
>would presume the people involved will eventually seek employment in
>the software industry. It's never too early to develop good habits.
Listen to these people. Worry about your own habits.
>--
>Bear Giles
>be...@fsl.noaa.gov/cs.colorado.edu
-Dan
Robert Kelly
This has the horrible potential of becoming a flame war.
Robert Kelly
rke...@triton.unm.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Did you know the phone company uses the bone marrow
of Third World babies to make microchips?"
Badger
Tom O Breton
I think it already is. And one of the dumber ones. Cut it out, guys, please.
Tom
--
The Tom spreads its huge, scaly wings and soars into the wild sky...
(t...@world.std.com)
Yuval Oren
hundreds if not thousands of dollars to send stupid questions
everywhere." But, too late to whine. Sorry for the name confusion. I
have already changed it to NH--. First thing Monday I will upload it
to wuarchive.wustl.edu in /pub/MSDOS_UPLOADS, along with the source.
NOTES:
The source (nhmm3src.zip) has *all* of the needed source. I fixed
makedefs.c, and I am including exactly what I used to compile with MSC
7.0 (Borland was impossible to get to work with the source).
The executable (nhmm30pc.zip) is the same as NH++, with the exception
of the name change, and now it works on 8086 and up. I didn't change
the code.
NH-- will now be the official unofficial version.
READ! :
Someone will need to find a permanent place to put the files. I don't
have time. Make sure you get both files from wuarchive, and mail me if
you're successful in finding a permanent home.
Thanques,
Yuval
P.S. my new mailing address is yuval@ocf. Mail anything there from now
on. tchnd-au is expiring.
--
________________________________________________________________________
|Yuval Oren |
|yu...@ocf.berkeley.edu |
| "One spoiled green bird is worth two cooks in the other grass broth."|
Yuval Oren
>on. tchnd-au is expiring.
make that yu...@ocf.berkeley.edu
HAROLD G BOUDREAU
>
>The executable (nhmm30pc.zip) is the same as NH++, with the exception
>of the name change, and now it works on 8086 and up. I didn't change
>the code.
>
A resounding thanks! from all of us still using (stuck with) 8088's!
Magnus Olsson
>In article <C03DE...@news.cso.uiuc.edu> dmd3...@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Daniel DuBois) writes:
>>be...@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU (Bear Giles) writes:
>>
>>>Unless NH"++" is written in C++, preferably with a solid object-oriented
>>>implementation, please don't use the "++" suffix.
>>
>>>That is as inappropriate as calling it NHada or NHlisp -- the "++" suffix
>>>is commonly understood to indicate either a C program _rewritten_ in C++
>>>or a C utility which now supports C++ as well.
>>
>>It's a little too late... The program is already 'in the field' being
>>called whatever it will be called for the rest of it's life.
>
>It is still possible to change the name. You would need to refer to
>the old name in FAQ lists for a few months, but that's a minor consideration.
Come to think of it, "Nethack" is a very silly and misleading name,
too. Haven't we all seen the postings to this newsgroup from somewhat
confuesed individuals who believe that the name of the group refers to
"hacking the net", or something like that? And since the media seem to
have hijacked the verb "to hack" to mean various kinds of criminal
activity, I really think nethack should be renamed to something less
offensive.
(:-) for humouristically challenged people whose irony detectors are
out of order)
Magnus Olsson | \e+ /_
Department of Theoretical Physics | \ Z / q
University of Lund, Sweden | >----<
mag...@thep.lu.se, the...@seldc52.bitnet | / \===== g
PGP key available via finger or on request | /e- \q
Merlyn LeRoy
"NetHack" was coined to differenciate it from "Hack", but it isn't
a network game, either. Misnomers abound.
---
Merlyn LeRoy
Robert Kelly
>
>"NetHack" was coined to differenciate it from "Hack", but it isn't
>a network game, either. Misnomers abound.
Good Point! And because it is not _really_ Nethack, we should call
it ReHack--. But since they included geeks and firemen, as if this
would be a good thing, we should call it:
Geeky_Flamefest_over_a_Stupid_name_so_HACK_off!
Oh, with the minus minus...
:-)
Robert Kelly
rke...@triton.unm.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Be quiet! Have you no backbone?"
"Of course not, you squishy doo-gooder, _I'm_ Doctor Calimari!"
Suicide Squid Summer Special