Is this an actual concern or a theoretical one? I think I heard that some nvidia specific features don’t work out of the box in some games but never heard issues due to wine ‘not implementing something’. I feel like that would just cause a crash, no?

I have no idea about c/c++ statics, does c even have statics? What kind of a scope could statics even have?

I’m very much novice myself and I never liked the idea of trusting the compiler with figuring out the correct overload and neither do I like not being able to tell which version of a function is being called at a glance. Named constructors ftw

I’m assuming static members are bad because globals are bad

“[] for arrays” is because they want to reserve it for generics once <> is retired

I think the oveloading thing is about the c/cpp thing where you can define the same function multiple times in the same namespace which yeah sucks imo

I have and they are not addressed, that’s why I commented as such. How would I know that one of the reasons you think <> are hard to read is because they are used as comparison and bitshift or that you intended () to be indexing syntactic sugar if I hadn’t read them? As for the second, I didn’t think how different languages managed to parse them matters as long as it doesn’t impact compilation times significantly, hence my comment.

Also dropping here the list of contrarian views op listed in the next article:

Language Design: Popular, but Wrong

1. static members
2. properties
3. <> for generics
4. [] for arrays
5. Type ident instead of ident: Type
6. having if-then-else and switch/case and a ternary operator
7. having both modifiers and annotations
8. async/await
9. separate namespaces for methods and fields
10. method overloading
11. namespace declarations doubling as imports
12. special syntax for casting
13. using cast syntax for things that are not casts
14. requiring () for methods without parameters

1. <> is hard to read for humans

Not really. <> is unusually pointy among the brackets and comparisons / bitshifts are used in different places than generics are so I’ve never confused them.

2. <> is hard to parse for compilers

I guess? Does this meaningfully increase compilation times?

3. It makes the uses of brackets confusing and inconsistent

No. A language that uses () for parameter lists, literals and indexing is much more mentally taxing to parse

Wow why is the latest ubuntu so much faster than last year’s?

Hope someone goes over the libreoffice ui to simplify its workflows and fix multi monitor support by then. That youtuber who designed musescore’s new version comes to mind

Progressed a bunch more in witcher 3 but got burnt out again. Finished ugly baby and it seems a bunch of side quests become unavailable after isle of mists and I don’t have time to binge them nowadays.

Tried to make progress in celeste and they bleed pixels but they were too hard. I think I’ll give up on golden strawberries and do the other stuff on celeste and might end up giving up on tbp entirely as the fire world seems impenetrable. The difficulty curve on that game is insane

Currently looking for a short ish easy game thag I can just play from beginning to the end without getting stuck or feeling completionist fomo. Suggestions?

The latency numbers of displays ie the 8-9 or 40ms include any framebuffer the display might or might not have. If it is less than the frame time it is safe to assume it’s not buffering whole frames before displaying them.

Your GPU has a frame buffer that’s essentially never less than one frame, and often more.

And sometimes less, like when vsync is disabled.

That’s not to say the game is rendered in from top left to bottom right as it is displayed, but since the render time has to fit within the frame time one can be certain that its render started one frame time before the render finished, and it is displayed on the next vsync (if vsync is enabled). That’s 22 ms for 45 fps, another 16 ms for worst case vsync miss and 10 ms for the display latency makes it 48 ms. Majora’ mask at 20 fps would have 50ms render + 8ms display = 58 ms of latency, assuming it too doesn’t miss vsync

Standards were settled on based on power frequencies, but CRTs were equally capable of 75, 80, 85, 120Hz, etc.

That’s why I specified 60hz :)

I see that you meant TVs specifically but I think it is misleading to call processing delays ‘inherent’ especially since the LG TV you mentioned (which I assume runs at 60hz) is close to the minimum possible latency of 8.3ms.

First time hearing that about OLEDs, can you elaborate? Is it that the lack of inherent motion blur makes it look choppy? As far as I can tell that’s a selling point that even some non-oled displays emulate with backlight strobing, not something displays try to get rid of.

Also the inherent LCD latency thing is a myth, modern gaming monitors have little to no added latency even at 60hz, and at high refresh rates they are faster than 60hz crts

Edit: to be clear, this is the screen’s refresh rate, the game doesn’t need to run at hfr to benefit.

I don’t think so. Most of the generated heat is dissipated instantly. The processor warms up until either it’s running at the necessary load or reached its max temp. The temps could increase slightly over time due to the air / liquid temperature (and non heat generating parts of the computer) heating up but that won’t dissipate in a minute

It really is. I often find myself avoiding long games with intermittent text or dialog (RPGs!) because I get bored when there’s none and want to listen to a podcast but can’t because then I’ll miss the next dialog.

There’s also the “I’ve got something to do so I can’t deal with starting up a game” and then spending an hour on youtube

Any is it not variable?

I don’t think I ever saw a Linux user that doesn’t want it to have widespread adoption

😐

Why not just use journalctl directly at that point

Nope

I just tried this and it seems mostly fixed? Focus changes on button down but the window is raised on button up