Search Results

Search found 11 results on 1 pages for 'gambit'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

  • China Condemns Google's Censorship Gambit

    <b>Datamation:</b> "A Chinese official has blasted Google's decision to offer unfiltered Web content to its citizens on the mainland, calling the move "totally wrong" and saying it violates Google's written agreement to abide by Chinese laws."

    Read the article

  • AI for a mixed Turn Based + Real Time battle system - Something "Gambit like" the right approach?

    - by Jason L.
    This is maybe a question that's been asked 100 times 1,000 different ways. I apologize for that :) I'm in the process of building the AI for a game I'm working on. The game is a turn based one, in the vein of Final Fantasy but also has a set of things that happen in real time (reactions). I've experimented with FSM, HFSMs, and Behavior Trees. None of them felt "right" to me and all felt either too limiting or too generic / big. The idea I'm toying with now is something like a "Rules engine" that could be likened to the Gambit system from Final Fantasy 12. I would have a set of predefined personalities. Each of these personalities would have a set of conditions it would check on each event (Turn start, time to react, etc). These conditions would be priority ordered, and the first one that returns true would be the action I take. These conditions can also point to a "choice" action, which is just an action that will make a choice based on some Utility function. Sort of a mix of FSM/HFSM and a Utility Function approach. So, a "gambit" with the personality of "Healer" may look something like this: (ON) Ally HP = 0% - Choose "Relife" spell (ON) Ally HP < 50% - Choose Heal spell (ON) Self HP < 65% - Choose Heal spell (ON) Ally Debuff - Choose Debuff Removal spell (ON) Ally Lost Buff - Choose Buff spell Likewise, a "gambit" with the personality of "Agressor" may look like this: (ON) Foe HP < 10% - Choose Attack skill (ON) Foe any - Choose target - Choose Attack skill (ON) Self Lost Buff - Choose Buff spell (ON) Foe HP = 0% - Taunt the player What I like about this approach is it makes sense in my head. It also would be extremely easy to build an "AI Editor" with an approach like this. What I'm worried about is.. would it be too limiting? Would it maybe get too complicated? Does anyone have any experience with AIs in Turn Based games that could maybe provide me some insight into this approach.. or suggest a different approach? Many thanks in advance!!!

    Read the article

  • What is the best way to optimize clearcase dynamic view performance on a linux client?

    - by gambit
    cleartool getcache -view -cview Lookup cache: 94% full, 6080 entries (307.0K), 308777 requests, 86% hits Readdir cache: 77% full, 4534 entries (1259.4K), 52233 requests, 91% hits Fstat cache: 89% full, 6188 entries (870.2K), 137811 requests, 100% hits Object cache: 100% full, 6188 entries (1146.9K), 290977 requests, 42% hits Total memory used for view caches: 3583.5Kbytes The current view server cache limits are: Lookup cache: 335520 bytes Readdir cache: 1677721 bytes Fstat cache: 1006560 bytes Object cache: 1174320 bytes Total cache size limit: 4194304 bytes Should I try to get my Object cache hit to be 100%? I have 2GB RAM.

    Read the article

  • scheme vs common lisp: war stories

    - by SuperElectric
    There are no shortage of vague "Scheme vs Common Lisp" questions on StackOverflow, so I want to make this one more focused. The question is for people who have coded in both languages: While coding in Scheme, what specific elements of your Common Lisp coding experience did you miss most? Or, inversely, while coding in Common Lisp, what did you miss from coding in Scheme? I don't necessarily mean just language features. The following are all valid things to miss, as far as the question is concerned: Specific libraries. Specific features of development environments like SLIME, DrRacket, etc. Features of particular implementations, like Gambit's ability to write blocks of C code directly into your Scheme source. And of course, language features. Examples of the sort of answers I'm hoping for: "I was trying to implement X in Common Lisp, and if I had Scheme's first-class continuations, I totally would've just done Y, but instead I had to do Z, which was more of a pain." "Scripting the build process in Scheme project, got increasingly painful as my source tree grew and I linked in more and more C libraries. For my next project, I moved back to Common Lisp." "I have a large existing C++ codebase, and for me, being able to embed C++ calls directly in my Gambit Scheme code was totally worth any shortcomings that Scheme may have vs Common Lisp, even including lack of SWIG support." So, I'm hoping for war stories, rather than general sentiments like "Scheme is a simpler language" etc.

    Read the article

  • Scheme vs Common Lisp: war stories

    - by SuperElectric
    There are no shortage of vague "Scheme vs Common Lisp" questions on both StackOverflow and on this site, so I want to make this one more focused. The question is for people who have coded in both languages: While coding in Scheme, what specific elements of your Common Lisp coding experience did you miss most? Or, inversely, while coding in Common Lisp, what did you miss from coding in Scheme? I don't necessarily mean just language features. The following are all valid things to miss, as far as the question is concerned: Specific libraries. Specific features of development environments like SLIME, DrRacket, etc. Features of particular implementations, like Gambit's ability to write blocks of C code directly into your Scheme source. And of course, language features. Examples of the sort of answers I'm hoping for: "I was trying to implement X in Common Lisp, and if I had Scheme's first-class continuations, I totally would've just done Y, but instead I had to do Z, which was more of a pain." "Scripting the build process in my Scheme project got increasingly painful as my source tree grew and I linked in more and more C libraries. For my next project, I moved back to Common Lisp." "I have a large existing C++ codebase, and for me, being able to embed C++ calls directly in my Gambit Scheme code was totally worth any shortcomings that Scheme may have vs Common Lisp, even including lack of SWIG support." So, I'm hoping for war stories, rather than general sentiments like "Scheme is a simpler language" etc.

    Read the article

  • SubmitEdge Review

    There are a lot of companies that will do certain SEO techniques for you ranging from directory submission to article distribution. However, very few companies will take on the full-gambit of link building at once. SubmitEdge has been around long enough to become an established presence in the SEO community. However, many people still question whether or not SubmitEdge can actually help. Here is a quick SubmitEdge review to give you an idea of whether or not they can meet your needs.

    Read the article

  • Why isn't there a good scheme/lisp on llvm?

    - by anon
    There is Gambit scheme, MIT scheme, PLT scheme, chicken scheme, bigloo, larceny, ...; then there are all the lisps. Yet, there's not (to my knowledge) a single popular scheme/lisp on LLVM, even though LLVM provides lots of nice things like: easier to generate code than x85 easy to make C ffi calls ... So why is it that there isn't a good scheme/lisp on LLVM?

    Read the article

  • Reporting on common code smells : A POC

    - by Dave Ballantyne
    Over the past few blog entries, I’ve been looking at parsing TSQL scripts in a variety of ways for a variety of tasks.  In my last entry ‘How to prevent ‘Select *’ : The elegant way’, I looked at parsing SQL to report upon uses of SELECT *.  The obvious question leading on from this is, “Great, what about other code smells ?”  Well, using the language service parser to do that was turning out to be a bit of a hard job,  sure I was getting tokens but no real context.  I wasn't even being told when an end of statement had been reached. One of the other parsing options available from Microsoft is exposed in the assembly ‘Microsoft.SqlServer.TransactSql.ScriptDom’,  this is ,I believe, installed with the client development tools with SQLServer.  It is much more feature rich than the original parser I had used and breaks a TSQL script into intuitive classes for analysis. So, what sort of smells can I now find using it ?  Well, for an opening gambit quite a nice little list. Use of NOLOCK Set of READ UNCOMMITTED Use of SELECT * Insert without column references Explicit datatype conversion on Sargs Cross server selects Non use of two-part naming convention Table and Query hint usage Changes in set options Use of single line comments Use of ordinal column positions in ORDER BY clause Now, lets not argue the point that “It depends” as smells on some of these, but as an academic exercise it is quite interesting.  The code is available from this link :https://www.dropbox.com/s/rfk32sou4fzl2cw/TSQLDomTest.zip  All the usual disclaimers apply to this code, I cannot be held responsible for anything ranging from mild annoyance through to universe destruction due to the use of this code or examples. The zip file contains a powershell script and my test cases.  The assembly used requires .Net 4 to run, which means that you will need powershell 3 ( though im running through PowerGUI and all works ok ) .  The code searches for all .sql files in the folder hierarchy for the workingpath,  you can override this if you want by simply changing the $Folder variable, and processes each in turn for the smells.  Feedback is not great at the moment, all it does is output to an xml file (Smells.xml) the offset position and a description of the smell found. Right now, I am interested in your feedback.  What do you think ?  Is this (or should it be) more than an academic exercise ?  Can tooling such as this be used as some form of code quality measure ?  Does it Work ? Do you have a case listed above which is not being reported ? Do you have a case that you would love to be reported ? Let me know , please mailto: [email protected]. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Documenting sp_ssiscatalog

    - by jamiet
    What is the best way to document an API? Moreover, what is the best way to document a T-SQL API? Before I try to answer those questions I should explain what I mean by “a T-SQL API”. I think of an API as being a collection of well-defined, known, code modules that provide some notion of a service to whomever uses it; in T-SQL terms I tend to think of a collection of stored procedures and functions as a form of API. Its a loose definition, I admit, and in SQL Server circles we don’t tend to think of stored procedures collectively as an API but if you think about it that’s exactly what they are. The question of how to document a T-SQL API came to my mind as I worked on sp_ssiscatalog. How could I make it easy for people to learn about the capabilities of sp_ssiscatalog without forcing them to dig through the code and find out for themselves? My opening gambit was to write documentation pages on the wiki at http://ssisreportingpack.codeplex.com. That’s kinda useful but it does suffer the disadvantage that someone using sp_ssiscatalog needs to go visit a webpage to read it – I want the documentation to be available wherever the user is using sp_ssiscatalog. Moreover, maintaining the wiki is a real PITA. Intellisense works up to a point, I guess: but that only shows whatever SQL Server knows about the various parameters, which isn’t all that much! I wanted a better way for my API users to learn about its capabilities and so I hit upon the idea of simply using PRINT statements within the code itself to inform the user what options are available; hence I added such PRINT statements in the latest check-in. Now when you execute (for example): EXEC sp_ssiscatalog @operation_type='execs' you can hit F6 a few times to view the messages pane and you shall see something like this: Notice that I’m returning information about all the parameters that can be used to affect the results that just got returned. I really do think this will be very useful to anyone using sp_ssiscatalog; I myself am always forgetting what the parameters are and I wrote the damn thing so I can’t really expect anyone else to remember them. I have not yet made available a release that has these changes in it but when I do I’ll blog about it right here. At the time of writing the latest available release of sp_ssiscatalog is DB v1.0.1.0 but if you want to the latest and greatest simply download it straight from source. Feedback is welcome as always. @Jamiet

    Read the article

  • Linux Distro - GUI similar to Windows

    - by DeaconDesperado
    I am in the process of refurbing several older laptop machines for use by a couple college guys we have in training to learn basic web development in python. These are students who intern at my company and are hoping to do some work when the summer comes building simple client-oriented webapps (learning the basics of OOP, MVC webapp design in flask, etc.). We're trying to function as the "practical" side of their education. I would like to get them set up on these machines we have sitting about, but I'd like to use a linux distro that would have a gui that closely approximates what they are being compelled to use at school (windows.) I don't really have much of a preference as far as GUI goes since much of what we'll be learning together is accomplished on the command line. I just see this as an easier adjustment for them while they are still reliant on a graphical environment. In the past I'd go straight for Ubuntu, but since they started using the Unity GUI the responsiveness overall can be pretty clunky on older machines, especially since these machines (there are four of them) run the gambit on specs (though all are at least 1.0Ghz and none have anything better than basic integrated video.) Has anyone had to setup a similar working environment in Mint, bare Debian or Zorin? Thanks.

    Read the article

1