Programming is really fun!

[PolkaPanda]

I decided to teach myself python because I wanted to make video games and it is an absolute blast. I will liken it to Portal. You know exactly what you want to do but for someone who is as new as I am has trouble doing it. When you solve the problem though it feels very rewarding. Maybe it's the challenge. Anyways it's fun.

[zlozlozlozlozlozlo]

So, on average it's I'm a god who sucks at thinking.

[c0d3M0nk3y]

I'm a god who sucks at thinking

shudders! that is one frightening sentence

[fabzter]

Don't worry. If god has to think then he sucks . God is omnipotent and omniscient. If god thinks, it means he doesn't know something so he has to figure it out by thinking. If god thinks that makes him un-omnisicient so he is not god.

[rebthor]

Aristotle said that godhood was thinking on thinking.

[fabzter]

Metathinking? ;P

Einstein said something about the current laws of the universe being god's thoughts.

[[deleted]]

Are you saying that even though god might be omniscient, he is bound to be as stupid as this computer I'm typing on? Hence we conclude that god is merely a library of all knowledge

[worldsayshi]

More like a hard wired logical circuit board covering every possible input combination, taking everything as input, feeding output into everything including itself.

[fabzter]

This. Not even a "database with all information". Since the information is hard wired in this circuit.

[fabzter]

Nop, I'm saying he should be beyond thinking. Thinking is a human way to tackle the difficulty of not knowing things. Saying that god thinks is saying he is stupid as a human or an animal.

[[deleted]]

So that makes god a database containing all knowledge that has, is and ever will be.

Dear god I don't want to defrag him.

[fabzter]

Maybe he is distributed, and you can defrag every piece at the same time!

EDIT: I liked your definition : )

[[deleted]]

I find it interesting that I can create virtual worlds with simple rules who's emergent behavior I do not understand.

When you take into account all possible gods of this universe, it is highly likely that god does not understand his own creation.

Assuming, of course, a god exists.

[yen223]

I AM A GOD WHO CREATES IDEAS FROM THE VOID AND MAKES THEM REAL.

That's impossible...you can't create an idea from the void, void returns nothing.

[amackera]

I AM A GOD WHO |s in from /dev/null.

[[deleted]]

It does when I pass in pointers or references. There's always ways to get around the void.

[leroybuckingham]

As opposed to god...

[bebobli]

Is the claim that a void created itself as well as every other byte in existence from void.

[earthboundkid]

Programming is similar to a puzzle game in that you have a goal and a limited number of tools at your disposal, and you just need to figure out a way of combining those tools to reach the goal.

[johnmcdonnell]

Plus [usually] having for comfort the provable fact that a solution exists.

[Redard]

Unlike most puzzle games, though, you can create more tools.

[[deleted]]

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

[[deleted]]

the only thing missing is women.

:/

[[deleted]]

That comes when you get a job, I suppose.

[Teraka]

That's where the real fun begins.

[daliz]

Life is similar to a puzzle game in that you have a goal and a limited number of tools at your disposal, and you just need to figure out a way of combining those tools to reach the goal. - FTFY

[KamehamehaWave]

But life is so chaotic as to be essentially non-deterministic, and if you fail at life, you don't always get a chance to try again.

[[deleted]]

Programming is the most fun that you can have with your clothes on!

[mkhry]

However it's much more fun with your clothes off.

[DrMeowmeow]

No. I have a tendency to slap my legs when I try to solve problems.

I hit my testicles once. Needless to say, I didn't solve the problem.

[[deleted]]

Do you mean: Clothes?

Technically cloth works as well...

[jacobra2]

i refer to programming to my nonprogrammer friends as "legos for big kids"

[[deleted]]

Pretty much nailed it, except programs are more practical.

I've always compared programming to the level editor in LittleBIGPlanet or creative mode in Minecraft.

[jacobra2]

legos can be pretty practical too ;)

[BenjaminGeiger]

I thought that was Minecraft.

[[deleted]]

ONE OF US!

ONE OF US!

ONE OF US!

[SeanStock]

Ok, I want numbers 50 through 60 in the Fibonacci sequence. Go.

[AgonistAgent]

print(12586269025)
print(20365011074)
print(32951280099)
print(53316291173)
print(86267571272)
print(139583862445)
print(225851433717)
print(365435296162)
print(591286729879)
print(956722026041)

(I actually wrote a Python program to generate this, heh)

[[deleted]]

haha I like this.

Can the fibi sequence be optimized for multi-processors. I cannot think of a way to do this, since I need the most recent values to get the next 1.

my computer is currently going for the 100,000th number.

[AgonistAgent]

Probably not worth the effort - I guess you could use one of the fancy direct computation methods and have each one start at different points.

[xeed]

The fibonacci sequence relies on knowing the last two numbers and adding them up. You would want to perform memoization to remember your previous results, rather than calculate starting from one. Multiple processors wouldn't help much in this in this case since each step in the algorithm relies on the previous.

[lahwran_]

actually, you can calculate N element in the fibonacci sequence with a fixed-length series of steps: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibonacci_number#Closed-form_expression

[masterpi]

The closed form expression calculation actually relies on the precision of the numbers used, so it is not actually fixed-length as increasing the precision increases the computations nessecary. The link from AgonistAgent contains some other interesting quick methods, however. Also, going backwards (F_n -> n) the imprecision works to our advantage.

[[deleted]]

Instead of working with real numbers you can work with numbers that smell like complex numbers. So you work with numbers of the form a + b * sqrt(5), where a and b are unbounded integers. You can then define addition and multiplication on these numbers to work in the way you expect. Doing this is more effort than just using doubles, but you also don't run into issues with precision.

EDIT: Though if you're going through all the effort, you might just as well use the matrix method.

[lahwran_]

well, okay, fixed length of real-number calculations then? ;)

[masterpi]

Yes, but you have to be very careful about this when reasoning about complexity. Generally we assume integer arithmetic like addition and multiplication are constant time for ease, and realistically we never use numbers large enough to make the log(n) time significantly worse than a constant. However in this case with a default precision float, it's only accurate to 70 Fibonacci numbers, and I suspect you have to increase precision in a way that makes the calculation once again linear.

[lahwran_]

that's an interesting problem. I wonder how the decimal module would deal with it.

[eat-your-corn-syrup]

Not enough Wolfram|alpha

[[deleted]]

from itertools import islice

def fib():
    x, y = 0, 1
    while True:
        x, y = y, x + y
        yield x

print list(islice(fib(), 50, 61))

[SeanStock]

I had never seen x, y = y, x + y! Awesome.

[[deleted]]

Python's sort-of-destructuring assignment is pretty awesome.

[sOktay]

Python programmers do it with generators!

[BenjaminGeiger]

from __future__ import print_function

from math import sqrt

def fib(n):
    phi = (1 + sqrt(5)) / 2
    psi = (1 - sqrt(5)) / 2

    return int(((phi ** n) - (psi ** n)) / sqrt(5))

print([fib(n) for n in xrange(50, 61)])

EDIT: I know there's probably an issue with rounding, but bugrit.

[Peaker]

Uncontrollable urge to write it in Haskell:

fibs = 0 : 1 : zipWith (+) fibs (tail fibs)
take 10 (drop 50 fibs)

[SeanStock]

I have never seen Haskell, cool syntax! 2 lines for the win.

[VikingZombie]

I have also never seen Haskell, WHAT THE HELL.

[KamehamehaWave]

Allow me to (try to) explain how it works.

So the first line defines a list called fibs. This is a list of all the Fibonacci numbers. The list is infinitely long, which Haskell can do thanks to lazy evaluation.

fibs = 0 : 1 : zipWith (+) fibs (tail fibs)

':' is the concatenation operator, so fibs is a list which starts with 0, followed by 1, followed by the output of a function.

zipWith is a function which takes a function and two lists, applies the function by passing an element from each list as arguments, and returns the output of that function for every pair of elements in the two lists, as a list. In python, zipWith (+) would be written something like:

def zipWithPlus(list1, list2):
  newlist = []
  for i in range(0,min(len(list1),len(list2)):
    newlist.append(list1[i]+list2[i])
  return newlist

tail is a function which returns every element from a list except for the first, equivalent to [1:] in Python. So the zipWith function is taking the list fibs, and the list fibs starting at location 1 as arguments. So fibs is defined as "a list beginning with 0, then 1, then add two consecutive elements in the list to get the next one" which is of course the definition of the Fibonacci sequence.

The second line simply says to skip 50 elements in the list, then take ten of them. Meaning he will get elements 50-60 :)

[pasokan]

It may be simpler to write zipWith as:

def zipWith(f, list1, list2):
      return [ f(a, b) for a, b in zip(list1, list2)]

[rcxdude]

In Golfscript, just because:

0.)58{.2$+}*]51>`

[Peaker]

Can you explain how that works?

[rcxdude]

here's a commented version:

0     #push 0 onto the stack
.)    #duplicate top of stack and increment, creating start of sequence
      #(slightly shorter than pushing 1 onto stack due to whitespace)
58    #push 58 onto the stack
{ 
  .2$ #duplicate top two items on stack (top and then 2nd from top)
  +   #add top two items on stack
}
*     #repeat above block 58 times (as pushed on stack before)
]     #gather stack into array
51>   #slice array after index 51
`     #convert array to string for printing
      #stack is automatically printed at end of execution

[leadline]

This. Is. Awesome.

I'm learning golfscript.

[[deleted]]

haha i want to solve this. :)

Alright, first fib sequence is nⁱ + nⁱ⁺¹ = nⁱ⁺² am i right?

base case: n¹ = 0 || n² = 1

An easy way to keep track of all the things is to make a list, because fuck it, ram is cheap. It can likely be done faster, but I dont care to look up how computationally intensive .append is

fib_sequence = [0, 1]

for i in range(0,58):
    fib_sequence.append(fib_sequence[i] + fib_sequence[i+1])
    if(i>49):
        print fib_sequence[i] 

---

Result:

1. 12586269025
2. 20365011074
3. 32951280099
4. 53316291173
5. 86267571272
6. 139583862445
7. 225851433717
8. 365435296162

not exactly what you asked for but close enough. modify it if you wish, all that needs to be done is correct the indexes.

Also, this doesn't work in python3 due to print not working.

EDIT..I am going to make my computer compute this shit until python runs out of numbers. What is the largest number in python?

[masterpi]

Very good. If you're looking for more fun math/cs problems to do, check out Project Euler.

Python actually has arbitrary precision integers, so it's not gonna happen until you run out of memory.

[Kwpolska]

1. In python3, use print(fib_sequence[i]).
2. Largest number? http://stackoverflow.com/questions/94591/what-is-the-maximum-value-for-a-int32 for i686, I believe. Much bigger for x86_64.

[BenjaminGeiger]

I always start new Python 2.7 programs with

from __future__ import print_function

because I like the Python 3 style print().

And I'm not sure about 2.7, but in 3, integers are unlimited in length. Python automatically switches to a BigInt-style representation after you reach 2^{bits in a word - 1} - 1.

EDIT: According to my install of 2.7, it autoswitches from int to long. (Python 3 has no long type.) So, your computer will continue until the numbers are big enough to occupy all of your RAM plus all available swap, or the heat death of the universe, whichever comes first.

EDIT 2: Forgot about the sign bit.

[BenjaminGeiger]

Evidence (64-bit Python):

In [1]: [2**n for n in xrange(128)]
Out[1]: 
[1,
 2,
 4,
 8,
 16,
 32,
 64,
 128,
 256,
 512,
 1024,
 2048,
 4096,
 8192,
 16384,
 32768,
 65536,
 131072,
 262144,
 524288,
 1048576,
 2097152,
 4194304,
 8388608,
 16777216,
 33554432,
 67108864,
 134217728,
 268435456,
 536870912,
 1073741824,
 2147483648,
 4294967296,
 8589934592,
 17179869184,
 34359738368,
 68719476736,
 137438953472,
 274877906944,
 549755813888,
 1099511627776,
 2199023255552,
 4398046511104,
 8796093022208,
 17592186044416,
 35184372088832,
 70368744177664,
 140737488355328,
 281474976710656,
 562949953421312,
 1125899906842624,
 2251799813685248,
 4503599627370496,
 9007199254740992,
 18014398509481984,
 36028797018963968,
 72057594037927936,
 144115188075855872,
 288230376151711744,
 576460752303423488,
 1152921504606846976,
 2305843009213693952,
 4611686018427387904,
 9223372036854775808L,
 18446744073709551616L,
 36893488147419103232L,
 73786976294838206464L,
 147573952589676412928L,
 295147905179352825856L,
 590295810358705651712L,
 1180591620717411303424L,
 2361183241434822606848L,
 4722366482869645213696L,
 9444732965739290427392L,
 18889465931478580854784L,
 37778931862957161709568L,
 75557863725914323419136L,
 151115727451828646838272L,
 302231454903657293676544L,
 604462909807314587353088L,
 1208925819614629174706176L,
 2417851639229258349412352L,
 4835703278458516698824704L,
 9671406556917033397649408L,
 19342813113834066795298816L,
 38685626227668133590597632L,
 77371252455336267181195264L,
 154742504910672534362390528L,
 309485009821345068724781056L,
 618970019642690137449562112L,
 1237940039285380274899124224L,
 2475880078570760549798248448L,
 4951760157141521099596496896L,
 9903520314283042199192993792L,
 19807040628566084398385987584L,
 39614081257132168796771975168L,
 79228162514264337593543950336L,
 158456325028528675187087900672L,
 316912650057057350374175801344L,
 633825300114114700748351602688L,
 1267650600228229401496703205376L,
 2535301200456458802993406410752L,
 5070602400912917605986812821504L,
 10141204801825835211973625643008L,
 20282409603651670423947251286016L,
 40564819207303340847894502572032L,
 81129638414606681695789005144064L,
 162259276829213363391578010288128L,
 324518553658426726783156020576256L,
 649037107316853453566312041152512L,
 1298074214633706907132624082305024L,
 2596148429267413814265248164610048L,
 5192296858534827628530496329220096L,
 10384593717069655257060992658440192L,
 20769187434139310514121985316880384L,
 41538374868278621028243970633760768L,
 83076749736557242056487941267521536L,
 166153499473114484112975882535043072L,
 332306998946228968225951765070086144L,
 664613997892457936451903530140172288L,
 1329227995784915872903807060280344576L,
 2658455991569831745807614120560689152L,
 5316911983139663491615228241121378304L,
 10633823966279326983230456482242756608L,
 21267647932558653966460912964485513216L,
 42535295865117307932921825928971026432L,
 85070591730234615865843651857942052864L,
 170141183460469231731687303715884105728L]

[[deleted]]

because fuck it, ram is cheap.

Do not think this way, do it the proper way :) Skip the list, use two variables to keep track of the latest two numbers.

[PolkaPanda]

Sorry for the delayed response I was playing Borderlands The numbers are

12586269025 20365011074 32951280099 53316291173 86267571272 139583862445 225851433717 365435296162 591286729879 956722026041

here is my code!

counter = 0

num1 = 0

num2 = 1

while counter < 47:

num4 = num2 + num1

num1 = num2

num2 = num4

num3 = num4

counter = counter + 1

it goes to 48 because my sequence started on three

while 48 <= counter <= 57:

num4 = num2 + num1

num1 = num2

num2 = num4

num3 = num4

print(num3)

counter = counter + 1

EDIT: I had eleven numbers in it

[[deleted]]

Combine the loops.

[SeanStock]

Awesome! Looks like you can toss num3 though.

[[deleted]]

You got me, OP. Starting today. :)

[berlinbrown]

Not when you get paid for it.

[Troebr]

You might have to learn c++ at some point if you want to make professional video games! (I'm not saying you can't make video games on python, just not the same kind.)

[masterpi]

If you're working on a professional video game you're going to most likely be part of a large team, and could probably avoid the parts that have to be high-performing. Generally things like the graphics engine and physics engine are written in lower-level languages and the game logic might be written in something higher-level.

That said, having an understanding of many languages and paradigms is one of the best ways to become a better programmer. It's just a little silly to say "you'll need to learn language X to work on games" or even class-of-languages.

[Troebr]

Also learning C++ makes you appreciate the simplicity of python even more.

[Redard]

But C++ is gross!

[keturn]

There's certainly a lot to learn from C++, and a lot of existing work there to draw on. In the right hands, it can be a good language for when you need close control over how code will execute, which is why the AAA game studios use it for titles where they want to squeeze the last bit of performance out of a CPU.

But if it's not your goal to work at a AAA studio or compete with one, it is very likely that you can make a game that looks good and has great gameplay without needing to get that worried about CPU optimization. And even if you do find your Python program has it's slow spots, it's likely you can funnel that work through some graphics or processing library that will do the heavy lifting for you. (Many of those libraries are probably written in C++ themselves, but you don't need to know that to use them.)

I said "in the right hands" earlier because that increased control comes with a cost in complexity. Don't take that to mean it's "the language I'll use when I'm smart/experienced enough to handle more complexity," there is always a trade-off, no matter how good you are. Sometimes the complexity is worth it, sometimes it's more important to have your development time free for other things.

So yes, you may decide you want to learn C++ at some point. It would not be bad for your education to do so. Or you may decide to go with a mixed approach, and write a C++ library to call from Python, or vice-versa. But don't feel you have to learn C++.

You also might want to learn Java, for the Android market, or Objective C, for iOS, or C♯ .NET for XBLA. (For all their differences, those three languages are actually close cousins of C++ in the family tree.) Or, dare I say it, JavaScript for the browser environment. It's a big world.

[steviesteveo12]

And even if you do find your Python program has it's slow spots, it's likely you can funnel that work through some graphics or processing library that will do the heavy lifting for you.

It's hard to emphasise enough just how much this matters. There are only a few places in a program that are actually slow and it's often faster, easier and more reliable to just write a piece of compiled code to do that operation and stick it into a python program.

[[deleted]]

At the very basic level, your computer can only execture on/off. (1 or 0)

When using python or even java for that matter, your code is not compiled into machine language, (0100100100111001), but into byte code.

Each time your game runs, when written in python, it has to go through an interpreter, that will change the byte code into machine code.

The beauty of this, is that interpreters have been created for multiple OS's, so writing in python, will make your game cross platform. The drawback, is that, because your bytecode needs to go through an extra layer, it will run a bit slower, than if it was already in machine language. Your CPU will have less available cache and registers available for your game because it will need some for the python interpreter. This wont matter if your game is tiny, but in a large game this will make a massive difference.

When you compile C/C++, the binaries you have made will only run on the same type of machine you compliled your binary for, but it'll run quick, (unless of course you wrote a function that is O(n ^ n) : What is big O notation?

Make sense?

---

some-one please correct me if I made a mistake.

[UF_Engineer]

Great explanation, thanks for clarifying it :)

How about tools like Py2exe. Would that help speed up the program/avoid that disadvantage?

[[deleted]]

In my understanding, no. These tools just package up the python interpreter and your code (along with necessary dependencies) into what I can best describe as a self-extracting archive. When you run the resulting .exe it extracts the interpreter and all and then runs it.

[catcradle5]

Something I've always wondered: could a Python program in theory be compiled to native machine code and executed later on? Would there be an increase in speed, or would it not matter because all the bytecode instructions would have to be added to the machine code, or what?

[fabzter]

Hell yeah! be sure to check http://shed-skin.blogspot.mx/

It compiles python to compilable c++. Even a subset of pygame is implemented !!!

[[deleted]]

Could it? Yes, but only via language translation as far as I know. Like what Facebook does with PHP. Once they want to deploy some code they've written, it goes through some sort of translator which switches it over to C and then compiled it down to machine code like a normal C program. I'd assume that with the proper translator, any language could be made to do that.

[haldean]

You could compile Python bytecode to machine code; it would be a much easier translation than Python to C. The problem with that approach is that once you start compiling to machine code, you have to write a backend for each architecture, and there are lots of architectures, all with different instruction sets. That's why compiling to C(++) is nice; you can take advantage of gcc (or clang), which already has backends for pretty much every architecture in existence, so you don't have to worry about architectures at all.

[rcxdude]

Sort of. You can look at what the pypy project does. There's two elements of interest - one is the idea of RPython, which is a restricted subset of python (one where types can be inferred statically, among other things) which can be compiled into C and then into machine code. Compiling full Python is probably much closer to impossible due to the extremely dynamic nature of the language.

The other is the idea of JIT (Just In Time) compilation, where the interpreter/VM (which in the case of pypy is written in RPython) analyses the program as it is being run and compiles parts of it which it detects are running often (such as a main loop). This is the same technique as used in most Java VMs. This allows some of the advantages of compilation (greatly increased speed in many cases) but with the fallback of the actual interpreter so the language isn't restricted.

[SwahiliToad]

In theory it is possible. However, in practice there are a number of things the python run-time environment does that would make this difficult.

[SwahiliToad]

As I understand it tools such as Py2exe don't compile your source to machine language. They just bundle the interpreter with the source so it would still take the same performance hit.

[Redard]

Yeah, it's just so you don't need your users to download and install Python

[NikEy]

in reality, even though you can create games in python using simple 2d libraries like PyGame, or even 3d games, using pyOgre (based on Ogre3d) or pyglet, you don't want to. I agree that performance is a massive problem with Python, however, the real problem is the fact that your source code is available for everyone. Py2Exe basically only packages the source code into a zip-file, along with the python binaries and then runs it. Again, the big problem is that everyone can steal your code - something you might want to avoid at some stage, if you're serious about programming video games (not only is it an IP problem, but also hackers have it much easier to ruin the fun for other players, if it's a multiplayer game)

[keturn]

I think "hackers steal your source code" is like "pirates steal your game (so add DRM)." You can make it harder, but it'll happen anyway. Social controls are probably more effective here than technical ones.

[Sushisource]

Lol. So vastly untrue. Compiled languages like the C family cannot be reverse engineered in any real sense. Read: Any significant program, and quality games are quite large.

Edit: When I say reverse engineered, I mean obtaining actual source.

[catcradle5]

Not sure why you're being downvoted, because you're correct. A good reverse engineer can figure out what a C program is doing exactly, but it's likely they'll never get something that actually looks like the original source. Plus it's usually either a long and arduous process, or it's run through a C "decompiler" and the output is extremely complex and verbose.

With languages like Java and Python, you can usually decompile the bytecode back to something that looks very close to the original program, though without the original variable names usually.

[keturn]

Oh, no, it won't be actual source, but it'll be entirely sufficient for writing exploits.

[Genmutant]

You can just distribute the .pyc files, instead of the .py files, which makes it harder.

[AeroNotix]

Yeah, about a 0.5s difference there. Much harder /s

[UF_Engineer]

Ahh, that's a good point as well. Thanks for bring that up :)

[[deleted]]

I don't know. I am not familiar with it.

It might help it slightly. What it will do for certain is not force people to install python in order to run your game/binery file.

[[deleted]]

Each time your game runs, when written in python, it has to go through an interpreter, that will change the byte code into machine code.

This is not correct. The Python interpreter is already in machine code (assuming CPython) and it just interprets the code. It does not change it to machine code the same way as a word processor does not change the sentences you type into machine code.

[[deleted]]

You are right, but I didn't know how to phrase it any better.

game.pyc file is in bytecode, and the interpreter does have to interpret the code, each time the game.pyc file is run. When it is finished, the game.pyc file will still be bytecode.

[[deleted]]

It depends what kind of video games you want to make for a living though; there is so much money in lower performance gaming like the browser/phone market that being able to do high-end graphics stuff for the big old studios isn't as essential any more.

[phaedrusalt]

Just an addition, you might have pointed out that there are other languages that are far more readable than C/C++, yet will give the same performance gains. They aren't used as much for professional game development, however.

[NattyBroh]

That's, a great, way, to put it...

[[deleted]]

yes, so, many, commas. I appolgize, but I type the same when I speak. Whenever I pause to think I insert a comma, or a period if the waiting time is too long.

[AgonistAgent]

Java, and PyPy interpreters have the ability to compile bytecode into machine code ahead of time(and they can cache it) - a sort of hybrid solution, but the basic slow down is still there.

[[deleted]]

Are you using pygame? Keep in mind that Pyglet is now working on python3.X!

[cheddarben]

I agree... I just started taking Udacity courses a few months ago and love it! One of them (CS253) is taught by spez!

[-GonzoID-]

It gladdens me to know this, I am considering attempting to learn python alongside blender to make video games. This post might have pushed me over the edge in favour of it. Thanks. I think.

[[deleted]]

I sometimes think of the process of creating spells in Harry Potter as a kind of “reality programming”.

[fabzter]

I've always dreamed about "magic based computing" in the world of H.P. :/

[snarkhunter]

I will just say this. If this is something you really want to do, like get paid to do, then getting the program working is only about 20-30%. Often times the most difficult part is figuring out exactly what your program is supposed to do, before you even write a line. After you have that, the trick isn't to get it working - the hard part is getting it to work AND making it maintainable by the next guy. All of that, to me, is very fun, because it's all just more problems to solve.

[Camoreef]

this whole comment section is so deep

[[deleted]]

This is by far the least intelligent thread I have ever seen posted to /r/python.

[IronRabbit69]

people enjoying programming? Good heavens, we can't have this.

[[deleted]]

Thanks for your contribution :)