• Taalen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        45
        ·
        5 months ago

        The way I understood it, it’s two million lines and nowhere near finished.

        Anyway, satire.

      • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        That’s the number of possible games, the number of possible board states is much lower, 10^40.

        Although you’re still clearly correct in the end anyways because it’s still an absurd number of board states and it’s not even formatted to be one state per line.

      • safesyrup@feddit.ch
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I read that there are less atoms in the universe than possible chess games, which is quite insane

        • chetradley@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          5 months ago

          By an extremely significant margin. Here’s another fun one: getting a unique shuffle in a deck of cards is 1/52!. So if you wanted to count all of the different possible arrangements of cards, counting one per second, you can:

          Start walking around the equator at a leisurely pace of one step per billion years.

          Once you’ve made it around the earth, remove a single drop of water from the Pacific Ocean and walk around the earth again.

          Once the Pacific Ocean is empty, re-fill it and lay a sheet of paper on the ground. Keep stacking a new sheet every time you’ve re-emptied the ocean drop by drop every time you circle the earth at one step every billion years.

          When the stack of paper reaches the sun, you’re about a third of the way there!

          • hakase@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            The way I like to put it is that every single time you randomly shuffle a deck of cards, you are guaranteed to get an order that has never been seen before, by anyone in history. That will be the case for every person who ever shuffles a deck of cards for the rest of time.

            • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              5 months ago

              To be fair there was that one time a perfect shuffle led to a perfect bridge deal, each player getting a full suit. Sometimes even a fair shuffle goes weird lol.

      • flames5123@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        You only have to code a fraction of those as the computer should take the same move for several of the user inputs.

      • Xyre@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        5 months ago

        For a second there I thought the 100% science-based dragons game had been made.

      • Da_Boom@iusearchlinux.fyi
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        Holy shit… That’s nuts. I do see the occasional boolean in there. But it might as well be ifs ints and strings like you said.

        Man went full static C programming in C# and coded the whole thing in what looks like one class. Instances?, loops excepting XNA gameloop? What’s that? Whos that? Where’s that?

        Honestly I’m not even mad, that’s dedication. Dedication and a refusal to learn more than just the basics. Kinda want to buy the game now just to see how far a fucktonne of if statements can get. By the looks of it, I’d say straight into the dragons maw.

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yandev as well. Guy put the ai for every single character in a single function separated with if/then statements. It was also called every game tick.

      • CeeBee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        My eyes! The global variable list is huge!

        Edit: nm, I looked again and they’re in a class. Still insane either way.

    • nicolairathjen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      5 months ago

      The post is satire, but I remember being ~8-9 and trying to create a “game” in Microsoft Word with hyperlinks between documents and nothing else. I had hundreds of documents (each representing a game state) before I got tired of that project.

      • aksdb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        That’s pretty clever for that age and shows, that your brain already had the right wiring for (software) engineering. You set out to solve a problem by leveraging the tools you had and bending their functions to your needs. There’s a lot of abstract thinking involved.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        5 months ago

        The person who downvoted you must not have thought it through.

        For comparison to that 10120 possible game states, the number of atoms in the universe is only 1082 and the amount of time until the “Dark Era” of the universe (after all the stars have died and even all the black holes have decayed via Hawking radiation) is only 10114 to 10117 seconds. In other words, it really is literally impossible either to build a computer big enough to store all the board states or to write them all down even if you did.

        • morrowind@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          is only 10114 to 10117 seconds

          I mean a good program could do a 100 million states/s . So if you could make a computer that lasts until the end of the universe it could go through all of them I guess?

          With supercomputers, probably way more, that’s just the figure for like a laptop. Plus you could filter out all the states that are symmetric and stuff and lower it by one order of magnitude.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 months ago

            I guess, maybe?

            I’m not prepared to speculate on the performance of a computer literally larger than the universe.

            • morrowind@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              that’s the most fun type of speculation. No fun speculating over computers that could emulate realistic things like all states of a rubiks cube, cause that’s probably already been done.

              • grue@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                …hey, wait a second, you pulled a fast one on me with that “100 million states/s” silliness!

                I just remembered what the time boundary I was talking about was actually trying to measure: it had nothing to do with the speed of computation; it was the speed of typing in the program code. That’s why 1 state per second was a reasonable estimate (if not overly optimistic). If you tried to type in all those ifs and prints manually, that’s what would take you longer than the heat death of the universe.

                Besides, even executing the program can’t do 100 million states per second because it only does one state transition and then waits for user input.

                • morrowind@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Oh I was assuming you’d write another program to create this program, like the “4 billion if’s” blog post if you’ve read it.

    • Droggelbecher@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      There’s a mathematician that figured that there’s 10^120 possible chess games, as a lower bound. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_number#:~:text=Shannon showed a calculation for,a Computer for Playing Chess". That’s a 1 followed by 120 zeros for just the number of possible games. With this method they’d have to manually go through every move for every one of those games. If we say a game lasts 30 turns on average and they’d take 1 second to code each turn (realistically it’d be longer) it’d take 6.9*10^109 (69 followed by 108 zeros) times as long as the age of the universe.