|
Is it enough to let the game know you own the other version, or do you have to actually play it on the other platforms...I hate console controllers with a passion - I've played GTA4 a tiny bit, for example - but there's no way I'd ever try to complete it
|
|
|
|
|
that's a good question. If i had to guess, i think just signing in with the game once is probably enough to do it.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
Everett Dirksen once said, "A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon you're talking real money."
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
While a small number of people in the world are well past the Int32 limit (two billion) on their bank account and are heading to the Int64 limit (9 quintillion, that's a 9 with 18 zeros) most of us (still relatively rich developers) struggle to get even past the Int16 limit (32 thousand).
Of course most people don't even need a byte (255) to store their financials.
Think about that, I'm saying we're relatively rich with just 32,000 when there are people who have 5 million times as much! 
Capitalism has failed, but I don't know of a better alternative...
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: Capitalism has failed, but I don't know of a better alternative...
I disagree, but the debate would be better suited for the Soapbox...
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm just saying the extravagantly rich are getting even richer while the poor are getting poorer (or at least not richer).
I guess that's part of capitalism so it hasn't particularly failed.
So maybe what I mean is that it's not a suitable economic and political system to live by (but still better than the tried alternatives, like communism).
If a system allows for seven people to be as wealthy as about 4 billion other people combined it's not a very good or fair system (and I know, those people aren't necessarily poor because of capitalism, but corruption as well).
Anyway, I was just giving my 2 cents (a day's work in some countries) without necessarily engaging debate 
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: heading to the Int64 limit (9 quintillion, that's a 9 with 18 zeros)
...but barely getting started. This 2017 article claims "...the total wealth in the world" to be $280 trillion.
Sander Rossel wrote: Capitalism has failed, but I don't know of a better alternative...
Loopholes in the various taxation systems have allowed it to fail. It can be corrected. You just need to have politicians willing to pass new laws (and commit political suicide in the process, which is why it won't happen)
|
|
|
|
|
[^]Quote: Within that document, you could create tables with formulas, similar to how you could with later integrated packages such as Microsoft Works or the modern Web document processors Quip or Coda. The Cat even allowed you to include computer code in the middle of a document that could be executed with a button press.
Instead of a mouse, the Cat had two thumb-accessible buttons under its space bar for its signature navigation/selection feature, Leaping. Say, for example, you wanted to navigate to the word ” feline” 150 lines up from the current cursor position (and thus offscreen). To move the cursor to the word, you would hold down the Leap key, type the first few letters (“fel”) and release the Leap key when the cursor arrived at its intended destination. Leaping was also used to highlight text, after which it could be formatted, moved, erased or printed. It married the efficiency of keyboard shortcuts with the intuitiveness and free-form access of graphical interfaces.
Video: [^]
«Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?» T. S. Elliot
|
|
|
|
|
This is the first time I ever saw one, and I was around for the pc revolution. Cool video. thank for posting.
|
|
|
|
|
So there's this tool, GOLD Parsing System - A Free, Multi-Programming Language, Parser Generator[^] that hasn't been updated since like 2012 or so.
It is (was?) a popular parser generator that uses a LALR(1) parsing algorithm.
I've written a LALR parser before and was thinking about reviving the project.
However, one of the things it could do was directly import this guy's material- including all of the grammars people have built for his parser over the years- into my system.
Not only that, my system is more powerful than his. So doing so comes with a number of advantages.
That being said, if I do this, and my project picks up any steam at all I'll have basically eclipsed his project.
And because it could use his grammars, a large part of the reason it could eclipse his is using his own material to do so.
Is this wrong of me? Should I remove that feature?
Edit: I haven't heard back from him so far. It's been over a month.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
modified 27-Jul-19 15:27pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Have you tried contacting him? He has a contact address on the site. If you don't hear from him after a couple attempts and a few weeks, then ask here. 
|
|
|
|
|
i should have mentioned that i did try contacting him.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
No need:
Quote:
The GOLD Freeware License Agreement
This software is provided 'as-is', without any expressed or implied warranty. In no event will the author(s) be held liable for any damages arising from the use of this software.
Permission is granted to anyone to use this software for any purpose. If you use this software in a product, an acknowledgment in the product documentation would be deeply appreciated but is not required.
In the case of the GOLD Parser Engine source code, permission is granted to anyone to alter it and redistribute it freely, subject to the following restrictions:
The origin of this software must not be misrepresented; you must not claim that you wrote the original software.
Altered source versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not be misrepresented as being the original software.
This notice may not be removed or altered from any source distribution
So include the notices, add him to the "About" box, and thank him - and include a github link to your project if that's open as well.
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
i mean yeah, legally i'm within my rights or i wouldn't even be asking this. I just don't think this was what he intended.
still, you're right, I am on solid ground there. So why do I feel bad enough about it to ask the question?
Maybe a question for a shrink. 
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
I think the fact that he licensed it the way he did was an invitation to use his stuff without worry.
|
|
|
|
|
yeah i know legally I'm in the clear. I was more just thinking it might be an a-hole move on my part - like i was taking advantage in order to undercut the other guy, even if that wasn't my intent.
i think after the responses here in their totality, I'm no longer worried about that. It was never about whether i had the right to do it though, or at least, that's not why i asked the question, if that makes sense.
best regards.
edit: woo, a local. I'm a seattle transplant. I moved about an hour north from there several years ago, but lived there for most of my adult life.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
adding, now I have to write a gui so i can add an about box
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
I see nothing wrong with writing your own thing that happens to be able to read the input for someone else's product (if I understood it correctly). Isn't that called backwards compatibility? Backwards compatibility doesn't infer compatibility between your own versions only of an application.
If not backwards compatibility, then call it interoperability. That, too, is A Good Thing(tm). The way I see it, this is how great software behaves, and evolves.
|
|
|
|
|
fair enough. =) and thanks for your feedback
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
Griff has given you the official, formal answer ("Yes you can") but it's an interesting point and one we've stressed over, talked about, tried to systematise, and eventually have sort of thrown our hands in the air about:
Developers often add licences to their code without thinking it through.
Developer A writes the code and says "do with it as you would". Developer B uses the code and it triggers a supernova and sues Developer A. Developer A says 'but I said I'm not legally liable" and the courts say "that's great but that doesn't work in our country".
Developer A writes the code and says "do with it as you would". Developer B unashamedly uses the code to create a product that makes Developer B a billion dollars and more famous than Hugh Grant. Developer A gets upset.
My advice is: go by the letter of what the developer has offered, but we warned that if they have impinged someone's intellectual rights, or written code that's unsafe, or inadvertently cause you to break a law in Yakyakistan then you'll be the one responsible, not them. Having said that, if you know the code has been developed from scratch and there's no SuperNova API exposed then you're probably fine.
BUT: if you yourself release the code for others to use then spend the 5 mins thinking it through and choose wisely[^].
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I love your answer despite it bringing me back to where I am basically at. Fortunately he lives or works out of san francisco or the greater bay area (his product is heavily branded with that and is named after the golden gate bridge i think)
So legally, I am clear. I just hope he doesn't dislike me for it.
I like his tool okay, but it's kind of limited, forces you to load a "compiled grammar" from a file, and is very VB centric (he wrote it in VB) despite it technically being able to render to many languages.
Plus his grammar syntax leaves a lot of room for improvement.
These limitations are why I don't use it. But it's a good product otherwise, and definitely a good piece of freeware.
It's not open source though, and that's disappointing. At least the latest rendition isn't still written in VB6!
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
His licence says
Quote: In the case of the GOLD Parser Engine source code, permission is granted to anyone to alter it and redistribute it freely, subject to the following restrictions:
The origin of this software must not be misrepresented; you must not claim that you wrote the original software.
Altered source versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not be misrepresented as being the original software.
This notice may not be removed or altered from any source distribution
Which is open source by definition[^].
Use it! Add to it! Make it better! That's the whole point of sharing the code. We do as much as we can then we hope others take on the task and move it forward and years down the line it comes around and we end up downloading some awesome app that used my free code, your free code, and free code from a dozen other developers.
It's why I started CodeProject.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
That's great in theory but he doesn't actually provide the source for it. I decompiled it, but it's obviously from VB.NET (you can always tell, even after it's been mangled to IL and back)
It doesn't matter, because I already have everything but the GUI.
And the main hangup on a gui is a syntax highlighting editor.
Which is a ton of work because you can't just subclass a richedit control. (i've tried)
there's a project here that has one, and maybe I'll use that.
but a gui isn't really on my priorities at the moment.
and I hate the idea of having to go all in on syntax highlighting like that. it's so much effort.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
codewitch honey crisis wrote: That's great in theory but he doesn't actually provide the source for it.
The GOLD parsing engine was ported to C++ over 20 years ago and is available here: C++ Gold Parser Engine
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
|
He has updated the codebase significantly since then but that's good to know.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
