Is there a language that can be used to describe the format of binary files? Currently when people need to describe a file format, they use tables and maybe structures in a particular programming language (C). If you want to use the format in a language with no equivalent, you must code it manually.
There seem to be attempts at it but none are in everyday use. Wikipedia articles for common file formats (like PNG, BMP or WAV) don't have links to this kind of description while they do contain links to pdf's and table-based descriptions.
have you considered contributing to gnash or swfdec
Maybe in the future. I tried using Gnash but it's not quite compatible with current games. I haven't tried swfdec yet. There's also a third contender for the title: Lightspark.
Right now, I think the best way to learn about the inner works of Flash is by doing and writing the player myself. However I might also borrow some things from the other projects such as visuals and audio, which are secondary importance in my case.
your emulator can't find the DLL's
can you upload a workin beta, gyorokpeter?
Currently it needs the Qt4 Core/GUI DLLs and OpenAL. I have uploaded a zip with all of these (it's at the Win32 link on the downloads page). Windows has a serious disability in this regard, lacking a decent package manager.
There are a few programs that refuse to install/run on 64-bit Windows. Old DOS/Win3.1 age stuff is the prime example. However, I think the change from 32 to 64 bit is not as drastic as changing from Win98 to XP or from XP to Vista/7.
I'm working on something like this, it's in a very early stage and it can only play toy examples (no interactivity either).
Details: http://people.inf.elte.hu/gyorokp/download/freesf/freesf.html
Unfortunately I can't work on it right now, don't expect progress on it until mid summer at best.
In Hungarian, most acronyms are pronounced as a word if it's pleasant to pronounce. And usually the pronunciation changes to Hungarian, which may sound quite different from the original language.
One special case: FAQ is usually called Gy.I.K. and pronounced "gyík" which means "lizard" in Hungarian.
Does anybody besides me have problems with the GC Pad and Wiimote plugins? I can never get them to be recognized, thus I can never play anything with this emulator.
There's currently none I know of, but I'm working on a program that will (if ever completed) make it possible. I'm doing this in my free time, which equals to zero at the moment due to studies. Currently the program only runs custom-built examples and will either crash or display a blank screen when trying to open a real-world SWF file.
More details can be found here:http://people.inf.elte.hu/gyorokp/download/freesf/freesf.html.
actually TASing flash games is likely considerably easier to implement than general windows games, and you wouldn't have to turn them into .exe files. That's because there is already an open source virtual machine for executing flash applications:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamarin_%28JIT%29
Someone would simply have to add the appropriate hooks for TASing (e.g., frame advance, etc.).
"Tamarin is not the same as Adobe's Flash Player, which remains closed source. The virtual machine is only a part of Flash Player."
Actually I'm working on a custom Flash Player implementation. It's still in its infant stages. For more info, see this.
I think Flash is vastly different from ordinary PC applications. It's a high-level object-orineted system that needs its own set of tools. It should be counted as a separate "console", while being able to TAS it using Windows tools is an indirect solution (imagine TASing a NES emulator that's running within a DS emulator).
At the command line, do
echo $SHELL
and it'll tell you what your shell is.
That doesn't work on Windows. ECHO %COMSPEC% has the equivalent effect.
In CMD, the command ECHO: has the same effect as ECHO., that is, printing an empty line. Labels in CMD have the colon at the beginning (for example, :ECHO).
Bash interprets the colon as part of the file name, so it looks for something named "echo:" which it can't find (unless you make one yourself), so it tells you that the command was not found.
I have always wondered why bits are used as the unit in these measurements. What possible info could it give that bytes couldn't? The only thing bits do is cause confusion. People don't measure file sizes in bits. They measure them in bytes. I have no idea what "103 megabits/s" means. I have to divide it by 8 to get a notion of how fast it really is. Telling it in bits is completely useless.
I think it has something to do with the network architecture. When you send data over a cable or other medium, you send it in bits. So when performing calculations, it's easier to do it without dividing by 8. When it comes to marketing... well it does a great job in confusing customers. The only rule to follow is "the higher number (and more expensive), the better".
If you want to know your internet speed in kb/s or similar, go to isohunt.com, search for the most popular term, find one with both a lot of seeders and leechers, then let it run for some time. Once it's done searching for peers, it will download and upload at your maximum speed, and most BitTorrent clients display the speed in kb/s.
It must be there, although my system calls it "Display Adapters" rather than "Graphics Cards" (you are lucky that I currently have an English version of Windows installed, normally I have Hungarian which calls it "Video cards").
I too find it unnecessary to require admin rights to copy files into individual programs' directories,
If this weren't the case, any old user could come along and put his own "custom" binaries in Program Files. An admin comes along and runs one and...well, game over.
It only goes if you are the only person using that PC. In a location where there are several users to keep quiet and keep from harming the system, using C:\Program Files with UAC protection is the right way.
As for circumvention: anyone who circumvents it must be prepared for the consequences. However, rather circumvent only a small part of it as opposed to disabling it altogether, since malware will probably still have to ask you for permission before compromising your system.
There's an easy solution for the "extract to program files" problem. Don't use the Program Files folder on your Windows drive. Put all your programs that let you choose the installation directory to another drive (or if you don't have more than one drive, which you should, then just come up with a directory name on your own that's not "Program Files" and "Windows"). Only C:\Program Files has the excessive protection. I too find it unnecessary to require admin rights to copy files into individual programs' directories, but I haven't been affected too much by this as I have used D:\Program Files ever since I got Windows XP and realized that in this system, reinstalling is part of the regular maintenance process.
Windows 7 is another piece of crap.. s hitty interface plus everything you try to do gets you a "denied acess".
Even using an admin acount you need a run as admin..
Windows is becoming Linux...
You can disable UAC if you don't like it.
In my opinion, UAC is the one of the few things that MS has done right. Have you ever heard of viruses or spyware on Linux? Probably not, and that's because the end user doesn't run with 24/7 admin rights so the spyware can't compromise the whole system, and even if it compromises one user, it should be easy to remove. Similarly, programs are written for Linux with the assumption that the user is not an administrator, so you won't have to mess with the admin tools if you want to run them normally. Those programs which you must run as administrator on Windows to make them work properly are either badly written programs or they actually need the admin rights to do their purpose (changing system-critical settings) so they should only be used when necessary. Currently Windows UAC is at a similar level as Ubuntu's "sudo"-based admin method, but it's definitely the step in the right direction.
I've split the full list into seperate files, of varying word lengths. This might be useful for people trying to do things with the shortest words possible. Neighbouring duplicates have been removed, but any from the original list missing letters have not been corrected..
3 Or Less Letters4 Letters5 Letters6 Letters7 Letters8 Or More Letters
What encoding are those files in? The "full" list is certainly not UTF-8, but it isn't ISO-8859-1 or 2 either. There's a word that shows up as "WH¶KA
" in 1 and "WHśKA" in 2, neither makes sense. This word doesn't appear on your 5-letter list, but it does on the 7-letter list as "WH�KA" (UTF-8) but it contains the actual "�" character rather than an invalid character.
[/URL]