Analog Chess – pieces are not constrained to a grid

Re:Analog Chess – pieces are not constrained to a grid by timerol on Friday January 13, 2023 @12:44PM (#34371121)

"Warning: This code is fucking awful.

Do not expect the code to be stable under any modifications, but you can try if you want I guess. Also there are barely any comments sorry. I am in Electrical Engineering and I like writing shitty code to piss off my Computer Science friends."

I appreciate this README's sense of humor

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Analog Chess – pieces are not constrained to a grid by bunnie on Friday January 13, 2023 @01:46PM (#34372097)

I can relate to this!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Analog Chess – pieces are not constrained to a grid by knodi123 on Friday January 13, 2023 @05:07PM (#34374564)

lol, "Run the .py file with the highest number, because I can't figure out version control." Says the guy who posted it to github.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Analog Chess – pieces are not constrained to a grid by felixworks on Friday January 13, 2023 @08:19PM (#34376215)

GitHub becoming Pastebin would be a hilarious turn of events.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Analog Chess – pieces are not constrained to a grid by Kamq on Friday January 13, 2023 @10:41PM (#34377194)

It's kinda close already. I've gotten several pdfs of books by cloning repos.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Analog Chess – pieces are not constrained to a grid by _Algernon_ on Saturday January 14, 2023 @09:02AM (#34380371)

You can upload files to github with drag and drop. They are not mutually exclusive.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Analog Chess – pieces are not constrained to a grid by remram on Friday January 13, 2023 @09:27PM (#34376760)

The fact that he released it is awesome. So many people never released their code because "it's not ready" or "I want to clean it up" or whatever.

Fucking awful barely-functioning open source code is better than no code available, every time.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Analog Chess – pieces are not constrained to a grid by tluyben2 on Saturday January 14, 2023 @03:33AM (#34378447)

My father (quantum mechanics) would sometimes submit awful but working code to Dijkstra without proofs just to piss him off. Dijkstra didn't like the looseness of the physics students when it came to software development, while physics students didn't like the software proofs for things in physics that were experimental and needed a 'quick' (nothing was 'quick' then compared to now of course) set of calculations/simulations and not waste time on writing formal proofs for them.

[ Parent | on HN ]