![](/i/fill.gif) |
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Invisible wrote:
> Question: Why is this undecidable?
It's due to a proof known as Matiyasevich's theorem which I'm not
familiar with the details of offhand. The gist is that you can show
that every recursively enumerable set* can be represented as the roots
of such a polynomial. Since there are non-computable recursively
enumerable sets there must be such polynomials (known as Diophantine
equations) which are not computable.
If you're interested in the details, this paper looks like it might be
useful, although I haven't read it myself:
http://modular.math.washington.edu/edu/Spring2003/21n/papers/hilbert10.pdf
If you're interested in the details, but less so, this is probably more
useful:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert%27s_tenth_problem
More intuitively, note that the problem statement come pretty close to
having Fermat's last theorem as a subproblem.
> Surely it's a trivial matter of iterating over all integers and testing
> whether any of them is a root?
If there is no solution to a given polynomial, when does this program
you describe halt?
* A recursively enumerable set is defines as any set for which these
exists an algorithm that will eventually list any number in the set, and
no numbers that are not. Note that the algorithm is not required to
ever halt, so you can't , in general, be sure which numbers are not in
the set and which are in the set but it just hasn't gotten around to
listing yet.
An example of such a set which is not computable would be the set of
numbers corresponding to the binary representations of all programs
which eventually halt.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Eero Ahonen wrote:
> I once made a Pong -clone with Pascal. It was very hard to beat the
> computer, since I saved memory and used the same variable for the Y-axis
> placement for computer player and the ball :).
Nice!
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
>> Question: Why is this undecidable?
>
>> Surely it's a trivial matter of iterating over all integers and
>> testing whether any of them is a root?
>
> If there is no solution to a given polynomial, when does this program
> you describe halt?
...so it's "undecidable" because you can't always figure out the answer
in finite time?
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Warp wrote:
> However, I unfortunately have absolutely no experience in using it, nor
> do I know how easy it is to integrate in Visual Studio. Being a C library
> it will most probably be of a much lower level library than an abstract
> high-quality C++ library would be, and consequently probably hard to use.
There are a few SDL C++ wrappers.
This one looked quite good:
http://sdlmm.sourceforge.net/
This one seems to suck at a first quick look:
http://sdlpp.sourceforge.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Invisible wrote:
> Indeed. Without having a way to talk to the native graphics control
> system to set up a drawing surface, OpenGL is no help. (There also seems
> to be some disagreement above whether you can use GLUT on Windows...)
Again libSDL :)
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
scott wrote:
>> Sadly, I'm utterly uninspired about what to write past my first usual
>> program, namely "Jotto". Any suggestions?
>
> How about something to solve/play a game, like Sudoku, checkers, connect
> 4, poker etc. Not a huge OO-based project, but certainly something to
> get started with.
That would be ... "Jotto". ;-) A good idea, tho. :-)
I'm more into the data processing stuff than the heavy calculation stuff,
altho fractals and CAs are always fun. I'll have to see what libraries I can
find for stuff before I decide, methinks.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Warp wrote:
> Coding a small game is always fun, and a good environment for
> object-oriented design
Thanks for the pointers to the graphics libraries. I'll check it out.
Any suggestions on libraries for things like regular expressions, parsing
CSV files, talking to databases, things like that? Or do people just
interface to C libraries for that sort of thing?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Invisible wrote:
> ...and this is the reason why. Almost *no* languages have the capability
> to easily draw graphics these days.
Tcl/Tk does, as well as anything built on top of Tk in general (including
Perl, Python, and Erlang). ;-) No 3D stuff, tho.
> This made me actually laugh out loud. For real. Such a glowing
> recommendation of the Win32 API! :-D
It's definitely ugly, and it shows its heritage too.
> (OTOH, I understand that the raw X Windows bindings are even harder...
If you want *raw* X Windows, try formatting the socket data yourself.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Mike Raiford wrote:
> Eero Ahonen wrote:
>> I once made a Pong -clone with Pascal. It was very hard to beat the
>> computer, since I saved memory and used the same variable for the Y-axis
>> placement for computer player and the ball :).
>
> Nice!
>
Nobody even noticed anything. Couple of guys tested it and played for
something like hour oslt and just told me that it's freaking hard :D.
-Aero
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
>> Indeed. Without having a way to talk to the native graphics control
>> system to set up a drawing surface, OpenGL is no help. (There also seems
>> to be some disagreement above whether you can use GLUT on Windows...)
>
> Again libSDL :)
It seems to do lots of interesting stuff. Sadly, I can't get the Haskell
bindings for it to work. :-(
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |