Creator of LULs (a script which helps links to point to your instance)

Come say hi here or over at https://twitch.tv/AzzuriteTV :) I like getting to know more people :)

Play games with me: https://steamcommunity.com/id/azzu

  • 4 Posts
  • 284 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 29th, 2023

help-circle
  • The JIT compiler of Java does the optimization you’re talking about. So that advantage of C++ is not really there.

    You can compile C++ for all architectures you want as well. The reason you don’t normally use Java for clients is that the garbage collector runs at undefined times, causing stuttering. This has been rectified through new algorithms though, so the real reason why you don’t wanna use Java is because it simply doesn’t have the best tooling and libraries that C++ has, no Unreal engine and no Godot.







  • Azzu@lemm.eetolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldLinux For Life
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I don’t know runit. Maybe runit didn’t even have a way to delay or customize shutdown, maybe it always just waits 5 seconds and then forcibly terminates a process, resulting in you never noticing when a cleanup job was too slow. Maybe you just randomly never installed a particular program with a slow shutdown job while using runit. There’s a bunch of reasonable explanations and possibilities for why this difference exists, and they can all mean systemd is perfectly reasonable.


  • Azzu@lemm.eetolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldLinux For Life
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    systemd moment in the sense that someone not affiliated with systemd used systemd to write a stop job that doesn’t terminate quickly? Or that you willingly installed software that brought along a slow stop job with it?

    This is like so far away from systemd’s fault, idk, it must just be a meme right?








  • Yep this is extremely weird. Public voting is reaaaally bad at this. I’m sorry, but Minecraft has sold over 300 million times. That’s literally 3.75% of the whole world’s population. It’s what a whole generation of kids grew up with, what shaped their minds massively.

    Shenmue has sold 1.2 million, I had never even heard of it (which admittedly is not a measure of influence, but it does mean something), and while it apparently was one of the first games with such an extensive open world, open worlds in general were already very desired, Shenmue didn’t influence anything really, it just tried to do it on a more massive scale, and even failed spectacularly economically.

    Probably not a person on the world (that does computer games at all) exists who hasn’t heard of Minecraft.

    It’s quite obvious that Minecraft should be ranked higher than Shenmue, but this questionnaire quite obviously only reached a very old demographic.


  • You for some reason assume that games would not have existed if not for being exclusive. But you do not actually know that. Yes, exclusive games do exist. But also quite obviously non-exclusive games exist. It is obviously possible to get games funded without being exclusive.

    It is impossible to predict the future, or similarly, predict alternative versions of the past. I do not claim to know for sure that the same amount of games would exist without exclusivity. But since non-exclusive games are possible, and actually in the majority, it seems very likely to me that when a consumer demand is there, supply for it would be created.

    In the end, this is an argument about cooperation vs competition. The argument for exclusives is basically an argument for competition. The argument against exclusives is one for cooperation. My base thinking is, why create many different consoles, that all just contain a CPU, some graphical processing unit, some way to load games on it, when you can just save the work of everyone developing their own thing and duplicating work, when everyone could just work together to create the same thing, just with more minds working together and without duplicating work.