Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Inside the PlayStation Suite SDK

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the any-security-features-in-there dept.

PlayStation (Games) 87

New submitter Serapth writes "Sony recently released the PlayStation Suite SDK to open beta. Using PSS, people are able to write games for various PlayStation certified devices in a C#/Mono based environment. This post takes a look at what's included in the SDK, which, surprisingly, is quite a bit."

cancel ×

87 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Didn't read tfa... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39791631)

...but I'm guessing "respect for the customer" was one of the things left out.

Re:Didn't read tfa... (1)

Gravatron (716477) | more than 2 years ago | (#39797953)

Herp, derp. Seriously, can the anti-sony fanboys at least be original in their bashing every once in a while?

Re:Didn't read tfa... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39798907)

Do you understand that being anti-Sony is the right thing to do due to their business practices?

Re:Didn't read tfa... (1)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 2 years ago | (#39818823)

That's like saying "can't you anti-nazi fanboys just leave hitler alone?"

Seriously, fuck Sony.

And yes, godwin in 3.

Incoherent strategy? (1, Interesting)

Qwavel (733416) | more than 2 years ago | (#39791665)

I heard Sony was determined to forge a coherent, integrated strategy, but now I see that their phones (some of which are PS certified) are all Android based, but the PSS is mono/dotNet based. What's going on there?

Re:Incoherent strategy? (2, Insightful)

TechNY (2625421) | more than 2 years ago | (#39791713)

I think it's a great thing actually. Now that they introduced that you can develop for all Windows, XBOX360, WP7 and PS3 using .net. For example C# really is an awesome language to code with, and Visual Studio is a great piece of software that totally kicks any other IDE's. I have tried Objective-C, Java and their IDE's several times and they come nothing close to how good it is to use C#/.NET. This is great.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (5, Informative)

_xeno_ (155264) | more than 2 years ago | (#39791763)

and PS3

Nope! PSP Vita only. Well, PSP Vita and "PlayStation phone" devices only. And I guess some Sony tablet thingies.

This is basically Sony trying to compete with iOS and Android as far as I can tell.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (1)

mdenham (747985) | more than 2 years ago | (#39791789)

and PS3

Nope! PSP Vita only. Well, PSP Vita and "PlayStation phone" devices only. And I guess some Sony tablet thingies.

This is basically Sony trying to compete with iOS and Android as far as I can tell.

I'd be moderately surprised if PS3 support isn't on the table for "later, as in once we're out of beta".

Not completely surprised, because Sony's been known to make massively boneheaded moves (like I have to remind anyone here about that), but it'd definitely land in the "dumb moves from a profit standpoint" category.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (4, Informative)

_xeno_ (155264) | more than 2 years ago | (#39791849)

Sony's own website makes mention of the supported devices requiring a touch screen, so, that kind of rules out the PS3:

You can develop games and applications that utilize physical buttons and touchscreen by using the integrated development environment (IDE) and simulator for the PC which are both included in the PlayStation(R)Suite SDK. [emphasis mine]

Then again, it's still in beta, and there are currently no requirements on what a game needs to support, so maybe the touchscreen support will be optional and you'll be required to support physical button controls as well, in order to support the PS3.

Plus, the FAQ explicitly says you'll still need a separate contract to develop PS3/PSP "Mini" games, so at present, it really doesn't sound like PS3 support is in the cards.

It seriously sounds like they're doing this solely to go after the cellphone games market. Apparently one of the demo games in the SDK is an Angry Birds clone, to give you an idea of the type of games they appear to be pushing.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (1)

TechNY (2625421) | more than 2 years ago | (#39791883)

Sony's own website makes mention of the supported devices requiring a touch screen, so, that kind of rules out the PS3:

You can develop games and applications that utilize physical buttons and touchscreen by using the integrated development environment (IDE) and simulator for the PC which are both included in the PlayStation(R)Suite SDK. [emphasis mine]

Sorry, but that just says you can develop games for devices that utilize physical buttons and/or touchscreen. That really doesn't sound like it's required to have touch capability.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (1)

s73v3r (963317) | more than 2 years ago | (#39797121)

That doesn't say that it requires a touchscreen. Just that it supports one.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (1)

Eraesr (1629799) | more than 2 years ago | (#39792939)

Actually, the PSP Vita isn't listed on the PSS website as supported device.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (2)

MacGyver2210 (1053110) | more than 2 years ago | (#39794123)

This seems to be exactly what Microsoft's XNA is for the XBox. Almost to the letter.

XNA uses C#/.NET despite this not being a native language for the XBox. It doesn't expose the full capabilities of the device, so you are relegated to 'arcade-like' games which are nowhere near as complex as a real, on-the-disc game written in a proper lower-level language with hardware optimizations.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39797079)

Exactly, mod parent up please.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39794481)

I believe I read in one of their docs that PS3 support is planned.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (1)

Wingfat (911988) | more than 2 years ago | (#39813197)

and PS3

This is basically Sony trying to compete with iOS and Android as far as I can tell.

Really? are you kidding? becasue you got me to laugh. 1. Sony Uses Google's Android on all their cell phones and pads. - that made your statment invalid 2. Since Android in on my Sony Xperia Play phone and I have all the apps and more games than iOS I think Sony is winning and Apple needs to comete with me.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (2)

Gwala (309968) | more than 2 years ago | (#39791765)

A lot of the top selling iOS/Android games are done with Unity [unity3d.com] ; which also uses C#/Mono. Actually the PS Suite SDK looks very similar to Unity in a lot of respects.

(Actually to take it a full loop; Unity pushes to the PS anyway, Rochard and a few others have gone cross-console with Unity)

Re:Incoherent strategy? (3, Interesting)

Tough Love (215404) | more than 2 years ago | (#39792015)

I had to scratch my head over this one until I realize that it's a kick at Microsoft... blessing the non-Microsoft incarnation of C# and making it, by definition, compatible. Truthfully though, I think Sony would be better served by sticking to the mainstream of what first string game devs are actually using. Not that I really care about the welfare of these two abusers. They make a great pair for a death spiral.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798263)

Agreed. Console have evolved and expanded into full-blown multi-media hubs of our living rooms. Minus Blu-Ray playback, the PS3, XBox, Wii, can all play games and stream NetFlix. The Apple TV in theory could play games too with an OS update and iOS games synced from iTunes. The path is clear to anyone that can see. It's no longer about the hardware. It's about cloud based content that can be synced between different devices. The focus is pointing at intellectual property and not so much the hardware now and into the future. PCs, Consoles, Pads, Smart Phones...you name it. Different ways of accessing the same content you own.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (0)

burisch_research (1095299) | more than 2 years ago | (#39792473)

Jeez, why is this guy scored -1 flamebait?! This deserves informative/insightful mods! Wish I had some.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (2)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 2 years ago | (#39792629)

Seemed pretty bizarre to me too. He got the PS3 bit wrong but flamebait? Don't think so. There seems to be a number of users who regularly get knocked back on quite reasonable posts. I'm starting to suspect an organised group of users down modding people whose politics they disagree with or something.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (2)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#39793061)

It's not an organized group. Slashdot works like this country does. If it were a single group then it would be totally fucked because all the bad moderation would be in a single direction. Instead there are multiple groups, and some of them aren't really even groups, just masses of like-minded people (kind of like Anonymous?) There's the faction of people who want to vote to correct bad voting. There's the faction of people who only vote up (or down) humor. There's the troll faction. And then there's several astroturfer factions; Microsoft is clearly well-represented, as is China. Don't forget the fanboy factions, either; I won't name them to dodge their downvotes :)

Re:Incoherent strategy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39793149)

Yes, his post is deep and full of argumentation. It's not just a simple provocative statement "C# and VS rules, other languages and IDEs suck in comparison". Not flamebait at all.

Oh, and "organized [slashdot.org] group [slashdot.org] of [slashdot.org] users [slashdot.org] ", you say? Go compare their style and popular topics in writing (hint: it's mostly "Google sucks" and "MS rules"). I'm sure I've seen a few others with same agendas, UIDs in same ~25-26*10^5 range and same theme naming.

So, you're only half wrong.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (1)

mdenham (747985) | more than 2 years ago | (#39791761)

Nothing different from the current state of XNA, really, I expect. In fact, I suspect the reason Sony's using a version of the CLR (probably without the system.windows.* portion of the class tree) is to try and poach developers who are already used to using XNA.

I'm planning on looking at this just to see whether or not it'd be feasible to write code that operates in all of the XNA-supporting environments as well as the PS-certified devices and PS Vita. If it is... well, $200/year for supporting everything might be worthwhile. (Assuming I can actually get a halfway decent game written.)

Re:Incoherent strategy? (1)

dririan (1131339) | more than 2 years ago | (#39791769)

There already is Mono for Android [xamarin.com] . If Sony didn't want people to pay for Mono for Android (understandable as it starts at $399 USD), they could fairly easily just make it themselves. Nothing's stopping anyone from running Mono stuff on Android.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (1)

sg_oneill (159032) | more than 2 years ago | (#39791965)

Well nothing exept the utterly absurd price tag that is..... With the returns of app stores for the average developer, its a pretty hard cost to justify.

Re:Incoherent strategy? (1)

dririan (1131339) | more than 2 years ago | (#39792001)

While I agree that it'd be hard to justify paying that much for a small developer, it's irrelevant as, just as I figured they probably did, Sony included some sort of way to run the things you make with the PSS on PlayStation certified Android phones. Unity does the exact same thing (provided you pay for the Android license); they ship their own runtime for Android so you don't also have to pay for Mono for Android. I don't know the details (I have the SDK installed but I don't have any PlayStation certified phones to test on), but you don't need to buy Mono for Android to run PSS stuff on PS Android phones.

That being said, when I said "Nothing's stopping anyone from running Mono stuff on Android.", I was referring to technological limitations. To make an Android app and release it on Google Play, you also have to pay a $25 USD registration fee, and you'll rip your hair out trying to do it without a real device to test on, so also whatever cost that is.

Real Answer: No (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39791669)

Can anyone be a developer?
We can't provide detailed information at this stage, but we are now making the necessary preparations to allow developers to smoothly move through the contract stage. We will post information on this website as it becomes available.

Re:Real Answer: No (1)

Gravatron (716477) | more than 2 years ago | (#39797977)

there is a fee involved, and I suspect, an ios style contract for selling apps, revenue sharing, etc.

If you don't even recognize the devices they show (4, Insightful)

assemblerex (1275164) | more than 2 years ago | (#39791671)

...it's probably never going to make you a penny developing for these devices.

Re:If you don't even recognize the devices they sh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39791953)

The same thing could be said about most open source software, you would have a better chance of making money if the end result was exclusively offered in a market place.

If you made a game using PSS and it was published the only scenario I can think of where there would be no pennies involved would be as a result of zero sales.

Re:If you don't even recognize the devices they sh (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 2 years ago | (#39792255)

xperia play, sony's tablets, and a bunch of se phones, recognize them all.

general android deployment would be a big plus though, now the biggest selling point is the built in libs and the ability to target vita.

Re:If you don't even recognize the devices they sh (1)

DarwinSurvivor (1752106) | more than 2 years ago | (#39792661)

Sure, but ask your average consumer what they are and you'll just get a funny look. Contrast that reaction to the fact that iPhone and Android are now household names in most 1st world countries and you start to see why developing software for them is pointless.

Oh Sony (2)

Riddler Sensei (979333) | more than 2 years ago | (#39791793)

There was a time that I worked for a video game publishing company and Sony's testing software had ZERO ZIP ZILTCH documentation. Specifically I worked on the online department. Microsoft had its Network Emulator for Windows Toolkit (NEWT) and Sony had its equivalent. It was backwards, awkward, and for a period time didn't event work (this was also around the time of the Sony network being hacked so we couldn't even release our titles if we wanted to). Figuring out how to hook their software up to our PS3s, let alone monitoring, was a GOD-DAMNED-NIGHTMARE.

People dreaded being assigned to work on the PS3 for version reasons just like this (among some others).

Oh, wow! (4, Informative)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#39791949)

No PS3 support. Only one device (PS Vita) that has a chance to be ever used by anyone.
Windows-only release based on Mono (and loudly proclaimed announcement that not even OSX will be supported [playstation.com] ).
Proprietary language controlled by a major competitor (yes, it is proprietary -- C and C++ are open, C# is proprietary).
2D only.
Free (in either meaning of the word) applications and games are not allowed [playstation.com] .
Sony reserves the right to prevent anyone from using it after beta.
Everyone who will be allowed by Sony to use it after beta, has to pay Sony.

That's like Nokia and Sony had a baby.

Re:Oh, wow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39791987)

Where did you get "2D only?" It comes with support for 2D graphics library, but you get full access to OpenGL ES 2.0 for 3D stuff.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#39792057)

It looks like it has some 3D support, but absence of an actual 3D game engine still stands out.

Re:Oh, wow! (2)

DrXym (126579) | more than 2 years ago | (#39792283)

Some 3D support? A look at the article and the demos suggests it has full 3D support. It's also clear from the article that it has a pretty rich programming API including physics.

The biggest issue I could level at it is C# is a strange choice though I suspect Sony are thinking that developers are likely to come from the XBox 360 XNA world than from the Java world. So I guess it makes some sense from that perspective but I can't help but think it will severely hamper developers coming from Java or C/C++ or those who want to use existing 3rd party 3D and physics engines. I expect most C# 3rd party libs are for supporting DirectX not for supporting OpenGL ES.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

s73v3r (963317) | more than 2 years ago | (#39797187)

So fucking what? There are several 3D game engines out there, use one of those. Or roll your own.

I don't think they have a 2D engine in there either.

Re:Oh, wow! (5, Informative)

tomstockmail (2056752) | more than 2 years ago | (#39791995)

1. It's for mobile devices. PS Vita is the current testing platform. When PSSuite launches, it will be available on Playstation Android phones (another whole story).
2. It's beta, but since it's a branded Mono Develop that means good things. iOS can only be done properly on OSX after all.
3. Yeah that was weird but they might be going for the XNA crowd.
4. There's 3D support, you're completely wrong. From their site [playstation.com]
>Rather than providing only basic samples for explaining each basic API, the SDK also gives you access to samples of games and applications using 2D and 3D graphics.
5. PSSuite will be a platform. Google can prevent anyone from using the Play store, Apple can prevent anyone from using the app store.
6. It will be $99/year, the same price as iOS development.
Looks like it's right in line with the other mobile platforms.

Re:Oh, wow! (2)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#39792093)

It looks more like a massively crippled platform with Sony trying to control access to the least-popular Sony-branded devices. Any combination of 2D and 3D game engines for Android would be superior in all possible ways except for Sony name not being attached to it.

Re:Oh, wow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39795073)

Any combination of 2D and 3D game engines for Android would be superior in all possible ways except for Sony name not being attached to it.

There are little to no high quality games on Android. The opposite is true for iOS. Its because Java, and to an extent Android are horrible platforms for writing any kinds of accelerated 3d graphics. Linux is only useful for offline CPU based rendering And android, having the same broken "giant monolithic binary blob kernel" non-design underneath like Linux is ill suited for high fps games. But even if someone was to cure this shitty design they'd still need high quality video driver support. Because Android runs on multiple different video chipsets, its impossible without a high quality API like directx to create games that run the same on all of them.

Re:Oh, wow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39795305)

Were you going for maximum FUD per character?

Not going to argue on a _very objective_ statement "There are little to no high quality games on Android. The opposite is true for iOS.", as I'm not much of a mobile gamer and hold the opinion that there are no high quality games on mobile platforms at all yet.

First, you can drop out of Java and write speed-critical parts of code in C/C++ with NDK.
Second, "Linux is only useful for offline CPU based rendering And android, having the same broken "giant monolithic binary blob kernel" non-design underneath like Linux is ill suited for high fps games." is plain counterfactual.
Third, "a high quality API like directx" (MS much?) for Android is called the same as one for iOS and many other mobile platforms - OpenGL ES.

Did you know that all those huuuuuge problems didn't stop Epic Games releasing Unreal Engine 3 for Android, for example?

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

s73v3r (963317) | more than 2 years ago | (#39797259)

Its because Java, and to an extent Android are horrible platforms for writing any kinds of accelerated 3d graphics.

Not necessarily. Java isn't that bad of a platform for that, and besides, anyone who's serious about it would be using the Native development kit and writing the core of the game in C/C++ anyway.

Because Android runs on multiple different video chipsets, its impossible without a high quality API like directx to create games that run the same on all of them.

Android has OpenGL ES. Meaning you only have the one high quality API you have to target. And on the PC side of things, DirectX doesn't make sure that games run the same on all devices. Compare a game running on a high end, current GPU, and a game running on one that's a few generations out of date. You'll notice a big difference.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

s73v3r (963317) | more than 2 years ago | (#39797209)

So you're just gonna throw out an assertion, with nothing to back it up, and with nothing to dispute his counterpoints?

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#39793041)

1. It's for mobile devices. PS Vita is the current testing platform. When PSSuite launches, it will be available on Playstation Android phones (another whole story).

And yet, there is no good reason why you wouldn't want to run these games on your PS3.

It's beta, but since it's a branded Mono Develop that means good things

Name one. You lost me at "Mono"

PSSuite will be a platform. Google can prevent anyone from using the Play store, Apple can prevent anyone from using the app store.

Google doesn't try to prevent you from making apps for their platform, they only control who can use the store. You have a point with Apple, but "they're no more evil than Apple" is not a good argument 'round these parts.

It will be $99/year, the same price as iOS development.

Let me say it again, slower, FUCK APPLE

Looks like it's right in line with the other mobile platforms.

Sure, except for Android, which is totally different since anyone can download the full source, anyone can download the SDK, and anyone can make an app you can load from an apk if you're not too dumb to buy an unlocked phone. So except for being totally unlike Android in every way, it's much like the other mobile platforms.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

tomstockmail (2056752) | more than 2 years ago | (#39796557)

I see slashdot comments become more and more useless with every passing day.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

Gravatron (716477) | more than 2 years ago | (#39798033)

It's become a den of anti-corporate, pro-piracy fanboys who had anyone who dares to sell anything for a profit.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

s73v3r (963317) | more than 2 years ago | (#39797317)

Before you blow a gasket bitching and moaning about the price of Apple development, need I remind you that Microsoft has the exact same costs? So every one of your "Fuck Apple" statements should be a "Fuck Microsoft" statement too?

Maybe you should try to tone down the Android fanboyism a tad. It's not like Android, no. Who cares?

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#39805519)

So every one of your "Fuck Apple" statements should be a "Fuck Microsoft" statement too?

Yes, fuck Microsoft too.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#39793777)

5. PSSuite will be a platform. Google can prevent anyone from using the Play store, Apple can prevent anyone from using the app store.

But you can add other stores as an alternative to the Play store.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

tomstockmail (2056752) | more than 2 years ago | (#39796537)

Right, such as the PSSuite alternative to the Play store. It's good competition. The Vita might not be able to add alternative stores, but most importantly Sony will be competing with Google on the Android systems.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 2 years ago | (#39792269)

It does seem a bit nuts to use Mono given that the primary targets are likely to be Android, the PS Vita and the PS3. One would think that C/C++ and / or Java would be a better fit.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

Pastis (145655) | more than 2 years ago | (#39792557)

Unity3d also supports Mono and is cross platform (iOS, Android, Mac, Windows, web, etc...). It's not nuts at all.

Re:Oh, wow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39792673)

It most certainly does have 3D support. You can simply create and draw vertices as you please. Generally anything that a simple OpenGL implementation would allow you - shaders, renderable textures, vertex buffers, etc. The 2D game engine is just a sample of what you could write, it is just a sample engine in the style of Cocos2D.

C# is not really effectively proprietary, mono is open-source and available to all.

It's not perfect, but it's a step in the right direction for Sony. A few more iterations of this sort of opening-up development would lead us to a good place.

Re:Oh, wow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39792927)

c# isn't proprietary, you dumbshit. It's a fucking ISO standard.

Should they have hopped into Googles shoes and based it on Free (as in not free in any meaning of the word) Java?

Leave the coding to coders.. Take your politics over to huffingtonpost and argue with the other bozo poseurs.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#39793315)

Java is also proprietary, just less idiosyncratic (what is really an accomplishment for C#, to be more idiosyncratic than even Java).

Re:Oh, wow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39793143)

Since it uses Mono's open implementation of C# and .NET, it's hard to wrap my head around what you think "proprietary" means. Often when people make statements which are arguable they include information to help the reader work out why they reached that conclusion. When they don't bother, but play lip-service to the fact it's arguable by restating their position ("yes, it is proprietary"), it's a red flag for intellectual dishonesty. You're presumably grinding an axe about software "freedom" here, but you're using weasel words to do it. Say what you mean by "proprietary" as opposed to "completely open implementation of a language anyone can download the spec for and/or buy books about"?

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#39793303)

C# is proprietary.

If tomorrow Microsoft will decide that C# must implement Qt slot/signal syntax and semantics internally, all C# implementations will have to implement Qt slot/signal syntax and semantics, or they will no longer be considered C#.

If Bjarne Stroustrup will declare the same with C++, Qt developers will support it, everyone else will tell them and Bjarne to go away, and there won't be a giant wave of bloat going through development of all compilers everywhere, blocking all useful work. Despite the fact that Qt is extremely popular among C++ programmers.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

tibit (1762298) | more than 2 years ago | (#39793717)

And how exactly is Qt signal/slot system a "giant wave of bloat"? If you look at the code generated by the moc, it's not much different from what you'd do using GSignal, just that there's a tool that does the mundane for you. It's about all you can do without having real compiler support, so you need a LISP runtime, or a JVM or CLR to get it any less bloated.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#39795495)

And how exactly is Qt signal/slot system a "giant wave of bloat"?

It does not belong in the language standard. There is nothing wrong with it being handled by a preprocessor, it just should not be in the language.

It's about all you can do without having real compiler support, so you need a LISP runtime, or a JVM or CLR to get it any less bloated.

Runtime/libraries, though are handled by the same organizations and included in the same documents, are distinct from the language itself. C running on microcontrollers is not any less C when it uses nonstandard or rudimentary libraries. When libraries contaminate the language design, language becomes an amorphous blob of squishy mess.

Moc vs. Cfront (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#39816399)

[Qt's system of signals and slots] does not belong in the language standard. There is nothing wrong with it being handled by a preprocessor, it just should not be in the language.

"Likewise, C++'s system of templates and classes does not belong in the language standard. There is nothing wrong with it being handled by Cfront, it just should not be in the C language." Would you agree with this as well?

Re:Moc vs. Cfront (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#39826701)

No. C++ contains four distinct and unrelated parts of its language (C, C preprocessor, classes, templates), however they are all parts of the language, not runtine/library. Slots/signals are very much specific to the type of a library that Qt is, so it should not be inside a language. If a general-purpose macro mechanism could be made (C++ already has two, C preprocessor and templates) so slots/signals can be implemented on top of it, that macro mechanism can be allowed in the language.

Qt predates solid template implementations (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#39827335)

If a general-purpose macro mechanism could be made (C++ already has two, C preprocessor and templates) so slots/signals can be implemented on top of it, that macro mechanism can be allowed in the language.

When Qt was first created, C++ compilers were defective; templates were not reliable across different brands.

Re:Qt predates solid template implementations (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#39829019)

Right, and Qt added an application-specific mechanism that solved one narrowly defined problem in a very effective but not generalized way. This is why it's not in the language.

Re:Oh, wow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39795185)

If Bjarne Stroustrup will declare the same with C++

C++ standard does not specify any such implementation details. There is no requirement on how the C++ compiler backend or underlying std libraries are to be implemented.

If tomorrow Microsoft will decide that C# must implement Qt slot/signal syntax and semantics internally, all C# implementations will have to implement Qt slot/signal syntax and semantics, or they will no longer be considered C#.

This is 100% false. C# is an ISO standard. Like C++ anything that conforms to the ISO standard will be considered C#.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#39795437)

Yeah, "ISO" standard. Just like .docx
Decisions are made by Microsoft, only by Microsoft, and only for the benefit of Microsoft.

Of course, Microsoft is busy trying to subvert C and C++ standards, too, but the key word is "trying". C# is their language to begin with, and they are in full control.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

s73v3r (963317) | more than 2 years ago | (#39797357)

Yeah, no. Now you're just trending into the angry FUD and conspiracy theory territory.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800029)

Should we go again through Microsoft "open" standards being pushed through various standardization processes against all rules?

Re:Oh, wow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39796193)

C# 2.0 is an ISO standard. Microsoft is releasing C# 5.0 now.

2.0 didn't even have short lambda function form and type inferencing, not to mention more fundamental things like LINQ and "dynamic" type.

So yeah, it "will be considered C#", and Ford Model T will be considered a car - it's just handling and maintenance will be a pain to anyone used to modern cars.

Re:Oh, wow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39795323)

You're right everyone will tell Bjarne to STFU because he doesn't control the language anymore. The ISO C++ standards committee does. You can bet that if the standards committee rolled some new functionality into the standard, compiler implementers will adopt it. They have to if they want to call their compilers conforming.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#39795403)

Do you see a difference between a C++ standard committee and Microsoft?

Re:Oh, wow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39795857)

No I don't. Both are external organizations making decisions about a language they control. I have next to 0 influence on either of them. In fact the head of the C++ standards committee, Herb Sutter, is a Microsoft employee.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

s73v3r (963317) | more than 2 years ago | (#39797345)

And then there would be this huge fragmentation of compilers, making it even harder to write portable code. That's not necessarily a good thing.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800043)

Yeah, right, C and C++ are SO FRAGMENTED!

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800645)

Who cares about what Microsoft chooses to do in C# v(n+1)? The changes to the language are backwards compatible (an explicit design goal), and you don't have to use the new features if you don't want to. Even disregarding that, obviously, Mono will keep working just fine, and will keep claiming support for C# v(n) - just not for v(n+1). If you want portability across platforms, you'll code to v(n).

This really isn't any different from Java, or a dozen other proprietary languages out there. Which doesn't stop people from writing useful stuff in them rather than doting over the fact that they aren't designed-by-committee ISO standards.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 2 years ago | (#39820991)

If tomorrow Microsoft will decide that C# must implement Qt slot/signal syntax and semantics internally, all C# implementations will have to implement Qt slot/signal syntax and semantics, or they will no longer be considered C#.

Sorry, you miswrote that, here, let me fix it:

If tomorrow ECMA will decide that C# must implement Qt slot/signal syntax and semantics internally, all C# implementations will have to implement Qt slot/signal syntax and semantics, or they will no longer be considered C#.

That's what you meant to write, correct?

Well, in any case, ECMA is actually a standards body, which means it does have the right to modify a standard while still claiming that standard is non-proprietary.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#39826713)

When was last time anyone but Microsoft was allowed to change anything in C# language standard?

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#39795601)

When they don't bother, but play lip-service to the fact it's arguable by restating their position ("yes, it is proprietary"), it's a red flag for intellectual dishonesty.

I am just sick and tired of closed things being called "open" just because there is no way to enforce proper use of the word. In 90's, I think, at least 80% of data formats, protocols and infrastructure products had names "OpenSomething" despite being completely closed in all possible ways. In 2000s a great shift happened -- companies who do that, placed some actual effort into creating the impression of "open standard" while keeping things as proprietary as ever.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

medv4380 (1604309) | more than 2 years ago | (#39794641)

PS3 support. I don't care. Probably requires a firmware update in order for it to work, and they are probably focused on the PS3's replacement. This is also an Open Beta. It's easier to control errors when you're only supporting 1 platform for the Beta. Their will probably be a staged beta period where other platforms are tested prior to a release version.

Compared to what you normally have to pay for the privilege of developing on any of the game platforms this is a nice and easy deal to work with.

Given that the GameEngine2D wasn't apart of the closed Beta I wouldn't put additional engines like a 3D Engine out of the realm of possibility for release at this point in time.

Re:Oh, wow! (1)

s73v3r (963317) | more than 2 years ago | (#39797179)

Everyone who will be allowed by Sony to use it after beta, has to pay Sony.

This isn't any different than most of the other programs. You pay the same amount to Microsoft and Apple for developing on their devices.

Support will be key (5, Informative)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 2 years ago | (#39792623)

Sony are infamous for being crap and dev support. A friend who has worked on a number of game projects says that they hate dealing with Sony. When they hit an issue developing for Xbox, they email MS and get a reply, often with a code snippet/workaround and by the end of day, On the other hand, they have to chase Sony over and over and eventually, weeks later get an email saying 'Look in the documentation'.

Re:Support will be key (1)

CronoCloud (590650) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800133)

I think part of the problem it seems that SCE(J) writes the dev documentation, and they suck. The language issue doesn't help either.

Let me give a couple of PS2 LInux kit examples. The Kit's distro is a Red Hat variant, but NOT a mainline Red Hat, but a funky crazy Japanese variant. called Kondara.

1. At first Sony said that you would need a VGA monitor to do the install, but could then set it after installation to use the PS2's DTV or NTSC modes if desired. Some people actually did a blind install. But some time after the kit release it was discovered that the RTE boot loader AND installer most certainly did support installing in the other modes through undocumented controller sequences. Just hold down Select + R1 and the RTE disc and installer boots in NTSC mode from the start.

2. The installed kit had a little utility that in some ways performed the desktop environment choosing functions of the modern GDM. It was apparently created by SCE(J) and worked in either console or X. Can't remember the name of it, but it had NO documentation.

Here's another example from the PS3:

There's a PS3 "app" called AdHocParty which lets a PS3 act as a sort of ad-hoc bridge to let one play Adhoc only (local wireless play) PSP games over the Internet. If you try to pull up the help page within it, all you get is a blank. SCE(J) never got around to writing the non-japanese documentation.

Re:Support will be key (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39800363)

Sorry to hear about this. As someone who manages in Dev Support at SCE, I'd like to talk to your friend more about this, particularly if it's happened recently. Please have your friend raise a support ticket to identify himself to us so we can go over what happened and how to do better.

And in the next firmware release (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39793039)

..... It will be removed without contemplation.

C#? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39793373)

Bitch please.

It's Sony...who cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39801559)

They dug their grave, and now it's time to lie in it.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>