So I wrote a blog about the issue of program complexity.
Its aimed at novice to intermediate programmers, and I hope it stirs some thought about how you can better write code without getting drowned in details. Nothing too new, so excuse if some of it is a 'duh' to you.I'd post the blog inline, but it's a little long and would be a bit hard to format.http://adam-dev-blog.blogspot.ca/2012/06/taming-program-complexity.html
I'm reading it now but I have to ask you something I always wondered.
Did you pick the name ludamad to mean game-crazy? I was in a game design class once where they explained that ludus (latin) means "game" and ludology is the science of games. So my immediate thought was, "So that's what ludamad means." But then I decided I was probably wrong.Ha. Ludamad is a portmanteau of three names, that's all. LUcas DAMian ADam.
To make the origins even more humble, I picked it for runescape …I've heard other good ones though. Like luda = feminine version of 'mad' in Czech (I think it was).Thanks for reading the blog! I may just post a followup today…Also. It's appalling how hard it is to apply the ideas expressed in my blog post to GML… Unless it's changed and suddenly has flexible, lightweight functions with sane memory management. If you actually want to return a data structure, you technically can, with the ds_ collections. However, the data structure 'numbers' GM assigns may as well be pointers, with no types to make matters worse, that have to be explicitly freed.