> whereas a 4X game tends to be more about resource management, research, and building spaceships.
I think those three are represented as well in Stellaris. As mentioned above research is done very well, and presents often dilemmas when you want to research multiple things and you don't know when a certain option will be available again.
Ships can be designed by the player and offer a lot of customisability. Resources are abstracted behind three basic resources so is probably not as deep as other games, but it is in.
I really like the randomness of Stellaris, not only of the research options but also the randomly generated galaxy and AI empires, which means you never encounter the same systems or competitors (unless, of course, you start in the Sol system or let certain empires spawn, which can be chosen at game start).
The article seems to be of someone who doesn't really like the game. Arguably it isn't as fleshed out as other 4X games, but to me it doesn't seem fair to blame it on the random generated content.
Seeing this for the first time today and it looks great! You explain things in depth and also focus on the tools that make it work (not only the pure Rust code). Keep it up, learning Rust is on my todo list and this seems a great project to use it.
I'm really interested to see how this will work out. I switched to Foundation from Bootstrap a while ago, but am considering switching back now that Bootstrap with v4 seems to have catched up with Foundation.
It seems that Zurb also took time to invest in the develop process, so designers/developers don't have to figure the same things out again for every project.
It's not my tool, but just discovered this and I think it can be very useful. Detects common problems and also checks for things like duplicate CSS selectors and heavy Javascript use.
Besides this hosted version there are other options available, including a commandline client and an API. Check the GitHub repo [1].
This looks awesome. Being able to program your own civilization without doing all the time-consuming micro-management is a wonderful idea. Almost every multiplayer game in this genre just costs a lot of time (for most games you have to log on every day or so because then certain actions are completed), and I always wanted to be it more strategical while not sacrifiying the possibilites that each "creature" has.
Some people point out that code sharing might be a problem, but I don't think it is. People have to adapt the code to their own environment and as the creator of this game pointed out [1] AI's will have to be efficient to not exceed resources. That will also limit the possibilities of just pasting some nice scripts.
I hope this game will be as awesome as it looks like and I'm excited to try it out!
I think this is a logical development. Firefox gets more and more Developer tools by default, but most users will never touch them. So it sounds logical to exclude Developer tools from the default package and instead offer an Developer version of Firefox.
Firefox is my default browser for a long time (switched briefly to Opera, but when they came with the new Chromium-version I switched back because I didn't like it) and I'm very satisfied with it. The developer tools are getting better and better, and I almost never touch Firebug anymore. Also I like Firefoxs tools more than those of Chrome, but that is a question of taste.
I think there is one thing Firefox can really make better for developers and that is addon development. I personally never developed an addon but looked briefly into it and from what I heard was that in comparison to Chrome, developing for Firefox is difficult. I hope there will be progress on this level too.
Why a different browser and not just an extension? I feel like different browsers leads to different versions of engines, languages etc. aka a lot of headaches. As a web developer, I want to see what my users see, not what "developers" see..
Actually, this version of Firefox activates a number of web features that are not activated in the release version, to let webdevs test against features that are either not 100% stable or not fully standardized yet.
It's not revolutionary (we're not releasing Servo yet), but it is pretty fantastic. I'd be shocked if most Firefox Aurora users don't switch over to the developer browser next week. :)
Well, we have had Firefox Nightly (which is the equivalent of Canary) for, well, as long as we have had Firefox. But activating some experimental features for webdevs is new.
I have no idea what Mozilla has been building, but I would guess building a browser from scratch with development in mind gives more possibilities than the most advanced extension for a browser. As long as the rendering engine remains the same as Firefox it wouldn't technically be a "different" browser, just a developer flavoured Firefox.
I think it's great that Mozilla is exploring new territories; it may or may not turn out to be a good idea, but give them the benefit of the doubt, at the end of the day no matter how good web developers tools currently are, without experimentation there would eventually be stagnation.
Well that's how developer tools for Firefox started out as (Firebug), however that was also dependent on a plugin API that gave access to all of those things; by building it in natively, the dev tools have access to all of the APIs, not just the ones exposed by the plugin APIs.
That is not really very relevant when building a Firefox add-on. Firefox add-ons get incredible access privileges to the browser internals. That is part of what makes it hard, but also powerful.
An example of what I mean, it was not overly complex for Sunbird (the calender app) to be turned into a add-on. There is no reason also for example that Thunderbird could not be turned into an add-on for Firefox. Except then you would have SeaMonkey...
But my 2c, is that even if the project does not work out as hoped, what ever they are doing can put turned into ad add-on.
SQL support is on the roadmap [1], along with other great features [2]. By the way, it is also possible to use Meteor mostly for the backend and use a framework like React or Angular for the frontend, although I don't know if there are big advantages with such a setup.
I think Meteor is a great concept because of their seven principles [3], which I haven't seen in any other framework. I haven't worked with Meteor yet but will start a project in short term which uses Meteor, so I'm very excited to see how this works out.
Why do you submit this to HN without even asking on the GitHub issue when this will be fixed or why it isn't fixed? This leads to unnecessary noise.
Also I think this isn't a "serious issue", duplications are most of the time filtered out very quickly.
ARMv8 is the upcoming 64-bit compatible architecture. This commit talks about adding support for ARMv8, so it is likely that Android will be adding 64-bit support. Qualcomm has already announced a 64-bit SOC, the Snapdragon 810.
Also, they talk about API level 20 which is one level higher than Android 4.4.
I think those three are represented as well in Stellaris. As mentioned above research is done very well, and presents often dilemmas when you want to research multiple things and you don't know when a certain option will be available again.
Ships can be designed by the player and offer a lot of customisability. Resources are abstracted behind three basic resources so is probably not as deep as other games, but it is in.
I really like the randomness of Stellaris, not only of the research options but also the randomly generated galaxy and AI empires, which means you never encounter the same systems or competitors (unless, of course, you start in the Sol system or let certain empires spawn, which can be chosen at game start).
The article seems to be of someone who doesn't really like the game. Arguably it isn't as fleshed out as other 4X games, but to me it doesn't seem fair to blame it on the random generated content.