Jump to content

gnumaru

Members
  • Content Count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. The "svg to pdf to png via ghostscript" method in the link you provided seems like the behavior I expect. However, the resulting png, as you can see in (1), looks bad, worse than my "svg to upscaled png to downscaled png" method. But using using ghostscript to create an upscaled png, and then downscaling it with imagemagick provides a much nicer result, as you can see in (2), though yet it is still a more irregular image than the one produced by the method I proposed earlier (it is less symmetrical, have some black pixels in unexpected places). I gave the unstable inkscape 0.91 a try and
  2. Has anyone already tried to make pixelated graphics from a scalable vector (svg) source? I use Inkscape, and I think working with scalable vectors in inkscape is easier than pushing pixels on a raster graphics editor like gimp, because vectors are more easily reusable and easier to change. However, Inkscape always does anti-aliasing when scaling down, which makes art intended to be pixelated look real bad when exported to png (I don't know about Corel Drawn or Adobe Illustrator, I have never used them). I made a bash script (shell script, if you prefer), which I'm attaching to this threa
  3. gnumaru

    Infinite game

    I found this article which seems interesting: http://0fps.net/2012/01/14/an-analysis-of-minecraft-like-engines/ The author does an analysis on approaches to implementing voxel engines. Even though it is about 3D worlds, you could just “cut out one of the dimensions” and think 2D =)
  4. Even though the “easy way” would be bundling and html5 game with a full web-browser, like intel xdk/crosswalk do on mobile (and like node-webkit does on desktop), there is great value in you initiative. It is certainly very annoying to make an html5 game with less than 1MB in size when zipped and see it grow to almost 20MB when packed in an apk with crosswalk. And certainly a full browser is not needed when all you want is only webgl. Also, I don't like the idea of uploading my game for some other service to bundle it inside an apk using some obscure process which may not always be available
  5. Nepoxx Indeed, the C compiler preprocessor would do with the files exactly what I do not want to do. I do not want to bundle every .js file into one single big file, that's what the C preprocessor does. But when I made comparisons with C includes, I was talking about execution behavior, the javascript execution behavior compared to the behavior of a compiled C code that got includes. For example, if you execute the following lines on your browser: /* ********** */ eval("var a = 123;"); alert(a); var b = 987; eval("alert(b );"); /* ********** */ The first alert call will alert '123' and the
  6. Hi everyone I named this post "Alternatives to organize code base into different files" because it is a more general than "alternatives to make modular code" or something like that. I like javascript a lot, but it being the ONLY LANGUAGE IN THE WORLD that does not have a way to load/reference a file from within another is what pisses me off most. Every language has it. C and C++ has "include", C# has "using", Java has "import" and php has "require" and "require_once". I bet even X86 assembly may have something like that. Nonetheless, javascript yet don't have it and only God knows if (and wh
  7. If you do not want/neet to concatenate the entire code base into a single js file, you can use my solution, executejs: https://github.com/Gnumaru/executejs It is not an asynchronous module loader like requirejs or a build tool like browserify, it is a simple facility to execute one js file from within other js file, like you would do with require and require_once in php or the several include/import/using statements from other languages like C, java and C#
×
×
  • Create New...