Re: Guillermito's Particles
- From: "JGCASEY" <jgkjcasey@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 17 Mar 2006 13:39:11 -0800
Frank Kotler wrote:
JGCASEY wrote:...
> As I implied above the only reason I can't use DOS is I would
> lose access to the hardware.
This is a strange statement. True, in a way. But you don't *lose*
access to the hardware in dos, you *gain* access! What you lose,
is a piece of software that does some "housekeeping" - the low
level bit bangin' - for you, and requires Windows. (at least, I
think that's the situation)
Theoretically, you could do this yourself in dos. You don't want
to! You said it was a USB device, right? Randy did some work with
USB. He estimated what it would take to get USB support up and
running "from scratch"... "three years", IIRC. I'm pretty sure we
could get access to a single, specific device in less than that,
but it's *much* too complicated to be practical. Someone who
probably works for the company, and has "insider knowledge" of
the workings of the device that we'll never get has written some
"housekeeping software" that we've pretty much "gotta" use.
So you've got to learn to access this software - is that the
DirectX part? And, from the "other end", you've got to get a
window up and be able to throw some pixels at it. Eventually,
some "user interface", so you can turn the camera on and off,
or whatever... (right?)
Where are you at, with this? If the tut you want existed, what
chapter would you be on?
Chapter 1 first sentence :)
As this is just a part time interest so I have to be very goal
orientated in what I learn. In practice I can and have been
playing with ideas (algorithms) using a VC++ shell in which
I can insert my C code with a slow old LogiTech SDK interface
to a webcam.
In the event that it might be of some help, or interest,
(to somebody) I've put "Guillermito's Particles" up on my
site. The site where I found it seems to have turned into
a blog... But it's "copyleft", and he "left" it for us :)
http://home.comcast.net/~fbkotler/gpart.zip
This is a "fireworks demo" sort of thing - more like
"fireflies on acid", perhaps. The "zip in a zip", "source.zip"
is Guillermito's original work - Tasm syntax. The rest of it's
my Nasm translation, with some alterations. There's an attempt
to cut it down to a "skeleton" - a "work in progress" - not
much progress.
This is bad. I hate trying to untangle someone elses code if
they haven't documented it and explained how it works. If I
wanted others to use my software I would explain it so clearly
they could whip up their own version.
I also hate fragments of information that half get you there
which is why I asked Wannabee if he was any good at tutorials.
Apparently however he doesn't have a complete grasp of DirectX
anyway. The ideal is a project such as a simple "fireworks"
and what is required to achieve that is explained. No info
overload. That is how the old books taught DOS, in *working*
stages.
It uses "resources" - a total "black box" to me - but is
otherwise very low level - too much so, perhaps, but at least
it's "transparent". No macros or HL constructs at all.
Anyone wants to fiddle with it or discuss it, have at it!
I'm sorry, I have a strong aversion to booting to Windows
right now... I have "ethical" issues, but not that strong,
I'm just not in the mood...
It is all about being in the mood :)
Best,
John
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Guillermito's Particles
- From: o//annabee
- Re: Guillermito's Particles
- References:
- Guillermito's Particles
- From: Frank Kotler
- Guillermito's Particles
- Prev by Date: Re: Guillermito's Particles
- Next by Date: Re: "We Never Use Assembly Language"
- Previous by thread: Re: Guillermito's Particles
- Next by thread: Re: Guillermito's Particles
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
