ID:136979
 
317 (notes)

Found a few fairly significant bugs (introduced in 3.0) and added a neat new feature. Because of the language change, worlds compiled in 317 must be run on 317 servers, but old clients can still connect to them.
Awsome Job! Tom, Dan, this new release stopped the bug when it was crashing while downloading some games, it still crashes while downloading the odd one, but nothing as bad as how it was! very good job, and keep up the good work!
- RaeKwon
Tom wrote:
317 (notes)

Found a few fairly significant bugs (introduced in 3.0) and added a neat new feature. Because of the language change, worlds compiled in 317 must be run on 317 servers, but old clients can still connect to them.

Interesting...so should my EventLoop library switch to using the new background behavior, or would it not really matter?
In response to Deadron
Deadron wrote:

Interesting...so should my EventLoop library switch to using the new background behavior, or would it not really matter?

It probably should. It is appropiate for any big loop where lagging the game would be worse than the possibility of short interruptions between iterations.

We may need to get a little live testing to perfect this, but it should already improve matters. It should be more effective than checking world.cpu alone, since the latter is updated statistically over multiple cycles and will therefore not give you immediate feedback.

--Dan
Congratulations!

Thank you Dantom for this amazing product!

I was browsing the net today when I decided to
check back the byond.com website after many months
away, and to my surprise, TODAY the 3.0 version was
released!

My heart feels the need to give it a try, so expect
a new game soon! :o)

Cheers to all!

Julio Monteiro

Question on background procs: Do these still obey order of sequence?

That is, if I call a proc like this:
proc/A()
B()
C()
D()

proc/B()
world << "Starting B"
for(var/a in 1 to 10000) ++a
world << "B done"

proc/C()
set background=1
world << "Starting C"
for(var/a in 1 to 100)
++a
sleep(0)
world << "C done"

proc/D()
world << "Starting D"
for(var/a in 1 to 10000) ++a
world << "D done"

If I do all that, will B, C, and D still all run in the correct order? Will it work even if C sleeps?

Lummox JR
In response to Lummox JR
Lummox JR wrote:
Question on background procs: Do these still obey order of sequence?

That is, if I call a proc like this:
proc/A()
> B()
> C()
> D()
>
>
> If I do all that, will B, C, and D still all run in the correct order? Will it work even if C sleeps?

Yes. Background mode does not also cause a proc to be "spawned" off unless you explicitly do so. The caller waits for completion, just like with any other proc. It's a lot like if you call sleep(0) at the end of loop iterations every now and then.

--Dan
In response to Monteiro

Nice to hear from you again Julio! It sounds like there was a timing problem in this latest release, so you might want to back up and grab 316, which is now on the download page again:) Fixing...

--Dan
Tom wrote:
317 (notes)

Oops. There was a major problem with the last release. We don't even know what caused it, but it looks like it's fixed! Everyone who downloaded 317 earlier today should grab it once again. Sorry for the trouble!
In response to Tom
awsome job tom! and you to dan!
- Rae
In response to RaeKwon
Only noticed one bug so far: and it's in the Release Notes!

"Background procs never trigger the infinite loop dector..." in the next to the last paragraph.

I think you meant "detector" :)

-jimm
In response to Monteiro
Hey man! Whats up? I remember my first BYOND game I played was with you. It was Space Tug. It was WAYYYYY back in the day.
In response to Sariat
Sariat wrote:
Hey man! Whats up? I remember my first BYOND game I played was with you. It was Space Tug. It was WAYYYYY back in the day.

Hey Sariat!

I remember you, that was a real lot of clock ticks ago!
I am sure we will have many more oportunities to play again!
Its nice to be around such a nice community again!

[]s

Júlio Monteiro
Is there someplace I can get 316? I updated to 317 and it completely broke Ballistic. I've updated all the sleep and spawn procs from spawn() to spawn(1) and sleep() to sleep(1), but now the game runs very poorly. I'd like to test it in 316 again to see if it is the new version of BYOND, or if something I did in changing over the sleep()s and spawn()s did it.
In response to Shadowdarke
Shadowdarke wrote:
Is there someplace I can get 316? I updated to 317 and it completely broke Ballistic. I've updated all the sleep and spawn procs from spawn() to spawn(1) and sleep() to sleep(1), but now the game runs very poorly. I'd like to test it in 316 again to see if it is the new version of BYOND, or if something I did in changing over the sleep()s and spawn()s did it.

Darn, sorry to hear about that. I suspect that 317 needs some fine-tuning yet.

You can grab 316 here: http://www.byond.com/download/316/
In response to Tom
It is definately 317. I'll send the project to you right away.
DanTom: You guys get my email(s) about getting the BlueBook? The moola should be there by now, if not soon...

-digitalmouse (wringing hands furiously over the thought of getting the BlueBook in the near future...)
In response to Monteiro
Cool! Maybe when I'm hosting my game you can come in and check it out! Oh, and here are some nifty BYOND-Related links.

http://byond.digitalmouse.org/
http://www.deadron.com/byond/ByondBwicki.dmb
http://www.byondscape.com


-Sariat
In response to Sariat
Sariat wrote:
Cool! Maybe when I'm hosting my game you can come in and check it out! Oh, and here are some nifty BYOND-Related links.

http://byond.digitalmouse.org/
http://www.deadron.com/byond/ByondBwicki.dmb
http://www.byondscape.com


-Sariat

Your forgot my site :P

Anyway, who cares, mine doesnt compare to those hehe ^_^

Lee
In response to digitalmouse
digitalmouse wrote:
DanTom: You guys get my email(s) about getting the BlueBook? The moola should be there by now, if not soon...

I've got a nice collection of fresh Euros in hand!!!

But no, we have not been receiving any email from you as far as I can tell. That's odd. I guess we'll just have to conduct business here in the public forum:) Shall we ship to the return address on your envelope?

--Dan
Page: 1 2