Scratch

archmage wrote:

RHY3756547 wrote:

archmage wrote:

Well, since you you are only running it in presentation mode the player will need to be faster than 4 times faster because the java player is much slower than the downloaded one. I can't really tell how much faster it will be because I don't understand how the player is made. I asked a question in the scratch 2.0 thread about this.

In any case I wouldn't count on such high efficiency jumps. If I were to guess I would say that the flash player may be up to 2 times faster than the downloaded presentation mode player.

Keep in mind that java isn't the best platform for things like scratch, games etc

Also - since Scratch 2.0 will be a complete recoding things may be done differently/better optimised.

It may just be translated and not optimized. You can't be sure unless you ask the developers. From what I've been reading java is about as good for web games if not better. Good things about flash are, more people have the player, faster start up time, and easier to develop with.

I am not sure what makes you think it will be so much faster. Everything I have been reading says that java is actually faster.

And I'm not sure what makes you so negative. How could scratch go any slower?

Lucario621 wrote:

RHY3756547 wrote:

archmage wrote:

It may just be translated and not optimized. You can't be sure unless you ask the developers. From what I've been reading java is about as good for web games if not better. Good things about flash are, more people have the player, faster start up time, and easier to develop with.

I am not sure what makes you think it will be so much faster. Everything I have been reading says that java is actually faster.

And I'm not sure what makes you so negative. How could scratch go any slower?

*imagines a slower scratch - has bad dreams that night* 

Scratch isn't always that slow. And as long as you keep programs simple, it is fine. But who are we kidding, good=not simple.

adriangl wrote:

Lucario621 wrote:

RHY3756547 wrote:

And I'm not sure what makes you so negative. How could scratch go any slower?

*imagines a slower scratch - has bad dreams that night* 

Scratch isn't always that slow. And as long as you keep programs simple, it is fine. But who are we kidding, good=not simple.

Lol yeah

archmage wrote:

adriangl wrote:

Lucario621 wrote:

*imagines a slower scratch - has bad dreams that night* 

Scratch isn't always that slow. And as long as you keep programs simple, it is fine. But who are we kidding, good=not simple.

Its more than that. Scratch only becomes slow when it runs out of resources and it takes waaay more resources than if the program was just coded in flash or java. By simple, you have to mean a program that a child with no programming experience made. If you mean simple by developer standards than in most cases that is too much for scratch. Simple is good depending on what you want. If you want to make commercial games then scratch can't handle it. If you just want to make experiments and really simple programs then scratch is ok. I like scratch style simple too, all of my projects are fairly simple.

Here is what I call simple

simple: something I can make up without referring to any guides.

Complex: Something I need to read a guide of first, then practice to understand the theory, then code.

Yes, simple is the most important thing you can do when programming.
KISS.

demosthenes wrote:

KISS.

This is random but
Keep
It
Simple
Silly!

I love that, um, is analogy the word?

archmage wrote:

I just don't see any reason for the new player to be so much better. I think the reason that its so slow is because of the way the code is interpreted rather then the language that is running it.

Umm

They're recoding the whole engine. The way code is interpreted may change for the better. Don't say it's just a translation. You don't know that.