This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Pwnator
Pages: 1 ... 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 [79] 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 ... 364
1561
« on: September 04, 2011, 07:27:13 AM »
Yay another VS/popup hybrid!
How about a shot showing the burst's reach?
1562
« on: September 03, 2011, 04:23:33 AM »
Forbidding the use of certain functions, certain data types, etc...
Our instructor pisses us off that way. >.<
1563
« on: September 03, 2011, 03:43:24 AM »
Your best bet is to make a flowchart. This is what I usually do when I'm trying to solve complex but recursive problems.
Also, are there any restrictions to your program?
1565
« on: September 02, 2011, 09:08:53 AM »
Plows, although you can still add a couple of weapons when you have the weight.
1566
« on: September 02, 2011, 06:26:08 AM »
So you got a Strange Shotgun?
FFFFFFFF- I need to get one of those >__>
(I forget how much they are)
Kinda hard to level it up, though. I keep getting assists instead of kills. >.< Oh, and it's 2 rec.
1567
« on: September 02, 2011, 06:24:25 AM »
I'm pretty sure Pwn made a 3WD MW rammer in stock a while back, but I don't remember him mentioning if it drove straight.
You mean this?  It was pretty much just a showcase of my awesome staxx0rz, but that's about it. Never bothered to AI it though, so I don't know if it can actually turn like it was supposed to.
1568
« on: September 01, 2011, 08:21:30 AM »
Shinies. I've had terrible luck with 2WD HWs unless they're HSes or specialized VSes. XD
And yeah 2 would do, but 3 is also fine. Remember, small tanks can be stacked.
1569
« on: September 01, 2011, 08:20:32 AM »
I was right on the battery! =D
The razors may do more damage, but when put against a bot with hammers, I suspect all the razors will fall off. Don't listen to me though, bad things happen when people take my advice.
d00d, this ain't DSL. :P
1570
« on: September 01, 2011, 08:13:47 AM »
You're wasting too much weight on the wheels, blades, tanks and probably some casters as well.
With this type of poker, you should be better off with razors and some side trappers. You wouldn't want your opponent to continuously escape your clutches.
1571
« on: September 01, 2011, 08:10:08 AM »
3.
1572
« on: September 01, 2011, 08:04:39 AM »
lolstack
You can save weight on the drive by making your anchor off-center and use 2 sideways 20cms. You'll have weight for a caster, although that's pretty much up to you.
1573
« on: September 01, 2011, 06:29:58 AM »
Blame the asymmetrical plow attachment. One notch is enough to deter people. :P
1574
« on: September 01, 2011, 04:41:19 AM »
WHOA. Did not see that coming. O_O
Just tested it on my buddy's Ubuntu and it also worked fine. No idea why this was an exception, though.
1575
« on: September 01, 2011, 04:31:38 AM »
All look good cept the SNS, which is really not good.
 Slightly worried about the fragility of the VS, BUT IT LOOKS SO COOL. Also, is the T-Wrex thingy actually effective?
1576
« on: August 31, 2011, 08:56:41 AM »
Another option, if you want to keep the asynchronous (=non-blocking) reading on the reader, you can refrain from printing data to the client unless read() returns > 0, which would mean some bytes were actually read, This way, the reader can still run on a loop, and do some other processing in the meantime (printing the time, blinking a cursor, whatever). However, this can be more CPU intensive, as a infinite loop like this (=a polled loop) is very CPU intensive.
A good compromise between the two (something asynchronous, but not so CPU intensive) is to use the select() syscall (or some OS equivalent, kpoll on Linux, something on Windows I forgot - they are usually even fatser than select(), which is standarized). This syscall allows you to specify a bunch of file descriptors (be it open files, fifos, or even network sockets), and will block until one or more of these descriptors can be read from or written to. Here's the fun part: you can also specify for how long it will block! This allows you to write code that will block, for example, for 0.1 seconds (waiting for the fifo to have somedata), and then return. If it returned the file descriptor, it means some data was available on it - then you can read() it. If it returns 0, it means the block time has expired, and no data was read from the fifo. After you either handle or not the descriptor, you can do whatever more processing you want, and then loop back to the select() call.
Of course, all of this is unnecessary if you can live with having a blocked loop :P.
This, kids, is why I don't regret not taking BS CS in college. XD All I did was remove both O_NONBLOCKs then this happened:  I'm compiling through BBS, and my university's computers are running CentOS 5 (HAHAHAHA SO OLD). And yeah, I removed the fifo before running it again. Does CTRL+C count as killing the processes? That might be my problem.
1577
« on: August 31, 2011, 08:13:26 AM »
I disabled both O_NONBLOCKs and for some reason the program just stops at open(). The printf() that followed it didn't come out. D:
1578
« on: August 31, 2011, 07:17:13 AM »
Dude, you have SSG. :P
1579
« on: August 31, 2011, 07:14:30 AM »
1580
« on: August 31, 2011, 07:09:16 AM »
On my way to create a two-way chat program using FIFOs, but unfortunately I can't even get my test program to work. >.<
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
/*A lot of excess headers because I'm supposed to add more functions, but that's for later*/
int main(void){
char buffer[128];
int fifofd;
char fifoname[] = "chatfifo";
int ret;
ret = mkfifo(fifoname, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR);
if(ret<0){
printf("'chatfifo' already exists.\nThis is the FIFO reader.\n");
fifofd = open(fifoname, O_RDONLY | O_NONBLOCK);
do {
read(fifofd, buffer, sizeof(buffer));
printf("Message retrieved> %s", buffer);
} while (strcmp(buffer,"exit\n")!=0);
close(fifofd);
unlink(fifoname);
}
else{
printf("'chatfifo' created.\nThis is the FIFO writer.\n");
fifofd = open(fifoname, O_WRONLY | O_NONBLOCK);
printf("Type in 'exit' to quit:\n");
do {
printf("Enter message to send> ");
fgets(buffer, sizeof(buffer), stdin);
write(fifofd, buffer, strlen(buffer)+1 );
} while (strcmp(buffer,"exit\n")!=0);
close(fifofd);
}
return 0;
}
The program should be able to run on two separate tabs/windows and should perform different tasks (one to write and the other to read). The do-while loop for the read() part just goes on in an infinite loop, which led me to a conclusion that read() returns a value of 0.
Now I have no idea where I went wrong - the 'if' block or the 'else' block. >.<
Pages: 1 ... 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 [79] 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 ... 364
|
Show Posts
