Comments on: A Lull in Development… http://www.philsteinmeyer.com/67/a-lull-in-development/ Phil Steinmeyer's rumblings on the game biz, programming, and life Sun, 20 Jul 2008 19:16:14 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Phil Steinmeyer http://www.philsteinmeyer.com/67/a-lull-in-development/#comment-209 Phil Steinmeyer Tue, 07 Mar 2006 18:09:35 +0000 http://www.philsteinmeyer.com/67/a-lull-in-development/#comment-209 Nick - it really depends on how you'd go about getting a framework, and your experience level. Using a 3rd party framework (i.e. PopCap's) would probably be faster than rolling your own, but that would depend on how closely the framework in question fit your needs. Off-hand, for me personally, ditching my current framework and using PopCap's framework would add 2-3 weeks. Ditching my current framework and rolling a new one from scratch might add 4-6 weeks. Nick - it really depends on how you’d go about getting a framework, and your experience level. Using a 3rd party framework (i.e. PopCap’s) would probably be faster than rolling your own, but that would depend on how closely the framework in question fit your needs. Off-hand, for me personally, ditching my current framework and using PopCap’s framework would add 2-3 weeks. Ditching my current framework and rolling a new one from scratch might add 4-6 weeks.

]]> By: Nick Harris http://www.philsteinmeyer.com/67/a-lull-in-development/#comment-208 Nick Harris Tue, 07 Mar 2006 17:42:25 +0000 http://www.philsteinmeyer.com/67/a-lull-in-development/#comment-208 Hey Phil, I really liked this post. This timeline is great for a second game when you have a lot of the framework in place. If this had been your first title and you had no framework, how long would you typically expect a project to take? Hey Phil, I really liked this post. This timeline is great for a second game when you have a lot of the framework in place. If this had been your first title and you had no framework, how long would you typically expect a project to take?

]]> By: Phil Steinmeyer http://www.philsteinmeyer.com/67/a-lull-in-development/#comment-199 Phil Steinmeyer Mon, 06 Mar 2006 23:21:12 +0000 http://www.philsteinmeyer.com/67/a-lull-in-development/#comment-199 When I talk about 'new' code in the above, generally it means fully new - not cut, pasted and modified, though I do that sometimes. When I talk about ‘new’ code in the above, generally it means fully new - not cut, pasted and modified, though I do that sometimes.

]]> By: Mobius http://www.philsteinmeyer.com/67/a-lull-in-development/#comment-196 Mobius Sat, 04 Mar 2006 19:45:11 +0000 http://www.philsteinmeyer.com/67/a-lull-in-development/#comment-196 That's just new code right? I sometimes used a mixture of new and old code where I had to manage file access and routine stuff. Though my typing speed is inversely proportional to its accuracy so going fast for me just means more compiles. That’s just new code right? I sometimes used a mixture of new and old code where I had to manage file access and routine stuff.
Though my typing speed is inversely proportional to its accuracy so going fast for me just means more compiles.

]]> By: m3mnoch http://www.philsteinmeyer.com/67/a-lull-in-development/#comment-193 m3mnoch Fri, 03 Mar 2006 22:05:05 +0000 http://www.philsteinmeyer.com/67/a-lull-in-development/#comment-193 mmmm... bbq is good! did i guess right? m3mnoch. mmmm… bbq is good!

did i guess right?

m3mnoch.

]]> By: Phil Steinmeyer http://www.philsteinmeyer.com/67/a-lull-in-development/#comment-190 Phil Steinmeyer Wed, 01 Mar 2006 14:09:49 +0000 http://www.philsteinmeyer.com/67/a-lull-in-development/#comment-190 I usually assume ~30 bytes/LOC. That's a crude assumption, based on looking at various large .C files I've written over the years. The LOC is simply the number of lines in the file (measured by any standard text editor), NOT the number of function points or anything like that. It varies a bit for me - probably the more accurate number is somewhere in the 31-34 bytes/LOC range, but 30 makes the math easy. So when I have one of those 100K weeks (again, rare, usually during 7 day/week crunch mode), I'm doing about 3,300 lines/week, or about 470 lines/day. If you're writing relatively simple code, it is possible to bang out that much. I usually assume ~30 bytes/LOC.

That’s a crude assumption, based on looking at various large .C files I’ve written over the years. The LOC is simply the number of lines in the file (measured by any standard text editor), NOT the number of function points or anything like that.

It varies a bit for me - probably the more accurate number is somewhere in the 31-34 bytes/LOC range, but 30 makes the math easy.

So when I have one of those 100K weeks (again, rare, usually during 7 day/week crunch mode), I’m doing about 3,300 lines/week, or about 470 lines/day. If you’re writing relatively simple code, it is possible to bang out that much.

]]> By: Factory http://www.philsteinmeyer.com/67/a-lull-in-development/#comment-189 Factory Wed, 01 Mar 2006 09:07:10 +0000 http://www.philsteinmeyer.com/67/a-lull-in-development/#comment-189 I was thinking 100kb per week is ridiculously huge amount of code per week, and that you must be bullshitting, and then I realized that you are not talking in LOC. OTOH 100,000 chars divided by 7 is 14kchars per day. Assuming 100 chars per line, that's 140 lines/day, which is more reasonable. I was thinking 100kb per week is ridiculously huge amount of code per week, and that you must be bullshitting, and then I realized that you are not talking in LOC.
OTOH 100,000 chars divided by 7 is 14kchars per day. Assuming 100 chars per line, that’s 140 lines/day, which is more reasonable.

]]>