I think we have to try these things at least once. My own attempt to write a javascript framework ended with me realising that I needed to put more effort into planning and research, which was a valuable lesson for me.
Right, I think the usual point here that if your goal is to make a game, then this is usually the painful route and conveniently one that up-fronts the likely more exciting and comfortable part for a software engineer, namely the software engineering. It also tends to defer the very important business of learning rather quickly whether our idea even leads to a fun game in the first place
That said, it's still a worthwhile exercise that one can learn a lot from.
Balance is required for everything. There was a youtuber called Randy, he tried to build everything from scratch using C and it took him 6-7 years to finally release a game. Meanwhile I watched a youtuber who just made games from fake-ads in Unity and marketed it well and earned bunch of money.
Do we want money or do we want to get the pleasure of being an engineer and make money as a side quest?
There was a video of tsoding about why he doesn't have a job, he says "when I have enough money for my needs I just go into coding instead of working". I like his vision. He likes coding for the sake of programming and earns money as a side quest.
There is another angle: what if you want to express yourself, but, say, Unity is too limiting? Existing game engines were made to express existing ideas and while there is some stretch they do have hard limits.
Hard agree. AFAIK Jon Blow's Braid couldn't be made with an existing engine (at the time) due to its time warping mechanics.
That's a big reason I like developing games with frameworks. It allows reusibility and access to clever code, while still remaining flexible enough to support weird mechanics.
Yes building tools from scratch is a great way to learn. In my carrier a rewrote bunch of front-end frameworks, but then instead of rewriting everything from scratch I decided to simplify existing structures.
Once I tried to create my own front-end framework from scratch. I created signal library, mounting/unmouting, context etc but never able to write v-dom diffing or using existing vdom libraries.
Then I decided just implement my API on top of Preact. Preact did vdom-diffing for me and mounting/unmounting which was enough for my need.
The final project looked nothing like Preact, it even had it's own context system, data loading, signals, setup + render and context which just hooks itself into Preact Context but taught me a lot about how a front-end framework work.
Yes, whoever can shrink this down to the size of something that would fit in your pocket would make a killing. Imagine not only being able to make phone calls, but use productivity software and even browse the internet.
The request said 'shrink it down,' it didn't also say, 'neuter it to 3 gigs of RAM and cut CPU and GPU performance to a small percentage of what it was such that many modern websites won't function.'
The T480 as a daily driver, while slow by current standards, would still meet the needs of many. I use mine often and with plenty of RAM and storage it's still very capable, if underpowered for some tasks.
Incessantly trying to make the Librem 5 happen, as if it's the answer to everyone's needs without a shred of practical reasoning, just makes the project look like a silly novelty.
Yes, shrinking things down has it's own costs and tradeoffs, what a surprise. Some people may find such tradeoffs suitable, in case the main features are still there. I do in this case.
Then actually state the specific costs and disadvantages when you respond if you have even a shred of interest in contributing anything remotely informative, so you're actually adding to the discussion versus consistently adding little more than noise.
Otherwise, you're just conducting a years-long, nearly endless amount of low-effort, shallow shilling of a commercial product here, as if it's the simple and pat answer to nearly every question asked, no matter how tangential or unviable, or more charitably, how particular a use case it serves.
Someone could complain about their 60 mile commute by car, and you'd say, "I really enjoy walking two blocks to work, you should buy these shoes," add nothing more, and then move on to do it to others several more times that day.
In a way it would almost be sad if you aren't getting paid by them to do this, because it's all so incredibly...measly.
> Then actually state the specific costs and disadvantages
Some of those are quite obvious and others are very subtle, so explaining everything is a waste of time. I do reply when someone asks additional questions.
> as if it's the simple and pat answer to nearly every question asked
I already mentioned to you earlier that this is not true and I comment whenever someone cares about the freedom of computing.
> In a way it would almost be sad if you aren't getting paid by them to do this, because it's all so incredibly...measly
Would you say the same about my years-long shilling of Qubes OS, too?
Nope they just called it a smartphone when you could hook it up to your laptop and connect the phone by infrared, USB, or later Bluetooth when it appeared. Using the phone manufacturers software that was naturally free for Windows 98 but also W2K, XP and even Mac sometimes.
You really want the headphones when you're using the laptop as a phone because it can have audio feedback otherwise, especially if using the built-in laptop mic.
iPhones just weren't that smart when they finally arose, you did have to use your imagination but it wouldn't get you far in actual computer interaction like smartpones are supposed to, compared to a Motorola or Sony-Ericsson true smartphone.
You can only imagine how much better it would have been if more choices would have maintained their leadership and there were still other options besides only the relatively shoddy Android and iOS.
Force yourself to use git with the command line for as long as it takes to not confuse you with day to day operations. Then choose whatever interface you want to make your life easier.
That's crazy! Imagine what The The and The Who would sound like? Not The The and The Who, but the The The and the The Who your comment alludes to. Or would the original ones be called The The The and The The Who?
This is the digital divide, where students from more wealthy backgrounds can afford access to better LLM subscriptions, and are able to achieve more "academically".
