pouët.net

AT LEAST IT AIN'T NO XOR TEXTURE by Horror Terror elite Legion [web]
[nfo]
screenshot added by tzaeru on 2008-10-31 02:59:08
platform :
type :
release date : october 2008
  • rulez 13
  • is ok 8
  • sucks 15
popularity : 0%
 0%
  • sucks -0.06
alltime top: #27721
added on the 2008-10-31 02:59:08 by tzaeru tzaeru

popularity helper

increase the popularity of this prod by spreading this URL:

or via: facebook twitter google+ pinterest tumblr

comments

Tadaaa!....... KEKE

The info file "only" takes 62.25 times more space than the actual PRODUKT. :-)
added on the 2008-10-31 03:00:23 by tzaeru tzaeru
-> And I was thinking to DROP KEY INTERACTION but then I figured that I'd be even more hated if people had to KILL this to close it.. Altough it could have been soo much more COOMPLEEX..... :(
added on the 2008-10-31 03:01:15 by tzaeru tzaeru
shitty indeed. but why did you use rar? i had to decompress it on a windows machine.
I wonder why.. That was a really good question. Actually, I think I compressed it to rar from just being used to it.

However almost every package tree SHOULD have 'unrar' software in them. Also all graphical uncompressers I've used have had a support for rar packets, usually through unrar.
added on the 2008-10-31 09:21:47 by tzaeru tzaeru
^ which reminds me that using things learned from this and the 512b with tvt, we'll probably do a real killer 4k for some party! This one took ~20 minutes to code, so figure we'll spend a little more time for a real 4k <3
added on the 2008-10-31 09:22:34 by tzaeru tzaeru
i don't have unrar. opensuse10.3 didn't add it by default. i also never needed it before.

good luck with your more serious prods :)
..More serious?.. Personally I like HTeL produktions more than anything I've ever done before ^,^

Then, I have the weirdest and shittiest sense of humor, or so I have been told.

Well, anyway, would indeed make more sense to put Linux-only productions under some other compression/packaging format.
added on the 2008-10-31 09:42:43 by tzaeru tzaeru
One line SDL-app ? This can't have required more than 10 minutes of work...
sucks added on the 2008-10-31 11:18:23 by sasq sasq
At least it isn't a xor texture. :)))))))))))))999999))))))999)))999
added on the 2008-10-31 13:15:55 by tzaeru tzaeru
tzaeru rauhotu nyt vähä :)
added on the 2008-10-31 16:20:34 by uns3en_ uns3en_
hähä, ehkä muiden pitäisi vaan villiintyä
added on the 2008-10-31 16:27:48 by tzaeru tzaeru
Try another hobby.
sucks added on the 2008-10-31 18:07:44 by Pirx Pirx
next goal: "at least it didn't suck hard"
added on the 2008-10-31 19:59:54 by hfr hfr
Thumbs up for making Pirx thumb down a small size prod that has original code. You're definitely setting up some scene history there boy!
rulez added on the 2008-10-31 22:59:59 by waffle waffle
thumbs up for getting thumbs up
rulez added on the 2008-10-31 23:04:34 by tejeez tejeez
I haven't actually seen the prod but thumbs up for getting two thumb ups in a row!
rulez added on the 2008-11-01 06:12:25 by Agilo Agilo
I haven't actually seen the prod but thumbs up for getting three thumb ups in a row! >.>
rulez added on the 2008-11-01 07:33:30 by panic panic
I think I'll have to thumb up my own produkt for getting 4 thumb ups in row.
rulez added on the 2008-11-01 10:58:39 by tzaeru tzaeru
C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!!!
sucks added on the 2008-11-01 11:07:58 by Jailbird Jailbird
sucks added on the 2008-11-01 11:47:12 by shadez shadez
Can we have the source code? :)
added on the 2008-11-01 11:54:59 by El Topo El Topo
They are already in the file! :)

Altough I can gladly discuss size optimization tricks etc more in IRC since it's something still exciting and fun for me anyway.
added on the 2008-11-01 12:00:47 by tzaeru tzaeru
It seems to write the source code to the disk when you run it.

Code:#include "SDL/SDL.h" int main(){SDL_Event e;SDL_Surface*s=SDL_SetVideoMode(640,480,16,0);do{SDL_Rect t;t.x=t.h=t.w=t.y=640-SDL_GetTicks()/16;SDL_FillRect(s, &t, SDL_GetTicks()*8);t.x=t.h=t.w=t.y=SDL_GetTicks()/16;SDL_PollEvent(&e);SDL_Fi llRect(s, &t, SDL_GetTicks()*8);SDL_Flip(s);}while(e.type!=2);}

Not particularly interesting even for a linux 256b.
sucks added on the 2008-11-01 12:03:10 by Sverker Sverker
YARR! it woulda have needed the key handling being got rid off :-)

but with linux much of the size optimization for that tiny stuff is thanks to the possibility of command line.

The 512b by tvt we made for Stream '08 was a lot more interesting for sure, altough even with it there was nothing much interesting :3
added on the 2008-11-01 12:05:07 by tzaeru tzaeru
sucks added on the 2008-11-01 12:07:12 by [self-ban] [self-ban]
Remember to also judge other HTeL demos! <3
added on the 2008-11-01 12:12:14 by tzaeru tzaeru
@tzaeru: Ah, I'm not used to all these clever *nix tricks :) I've now made a Windows port in Mingw32 but that wasn't 256 bytes unfortunately :)
added on the 2008-11-01 12:28:39 by El Topo El Topo
How big does the compiled exe get under Linux btw?
added on the 2008-11-01 13:28:53 by El Topo El Topo
Well, depends how I wanna compile it.

Compiling with standard optimization level and no binary compression, it's 8222 bytes on my system.

With further optimization and binary compression, using the same makefile I used for one shitty 4k I participated without manual linking, it's 1440 bytes.

Then, finally, with manual linking and custom starting and exiting code, it's down to 795 bytes.

I've concluded that compiling source is usually around 25-45% smaller in 4k's than an actual binary is. For tinier intros the difference is much more visible though.
added on the 2008-11-01 14:17:00 by tzaeru tzaeru
compiling source = self compiling binary

<.<
added on the 2008-11-01 14:17:37 by tzaeru tzaeru
err. I meant. SELF COMPILING -EXECUTABLE-.

fuck, can't apparently type today.
added on the 2008-11-01 14:17:57 by tzaeru tzaeru
It's actually true that making a 256b intro with that effect in linux is actually quite ok trick. I don't recall that many have actually published that even if some people have suggested the trick much earlier.

Anyway as a comparision: compiling the thing without function hash value trick would be somewhere around 1KB compressed.

Altho objectivily I still wouldn't give this a thumb since it's not much of a achievement making this but it's clearly not a thumb down technically wise even tho considering tzaeru's obvious influence by viznutism.
added on the 2008-11-01 14:23:53 by waffle waffle
Impressive, I guess one could achieve similar sizes under Win32 by linking with crinkler or something. Anyway, now I have some ideas to make my own SDL-nonsense :)
added on the 2008-11-01 14:27:04 by El Topo El Topo
El Topo: There's DOS compatibility mode in Windows so no need to try to do this and basically this trick can't really be achieved in windows since windows doesn't have compilation tools by default installed(neither does Linux but usually distros still distribute those tools so I consider this as acceptable trick). This is just a Linux platform specified trick.

The explanation comment mostly was just for people thumbing this prod down and thumbing up some DOS <= 128b productions which are the same quality as this is.
added on the 2008-11-01 14:39:43 by waffle waffle
@waffle: Yeah, I got that part about the *nix specific compile-and-execute trick not being possible under win32. I meant more effects-wise :)
added on the 2008-11-01 16:19:46 by El Topo El Topo
ah ok then :)
added on the 2008-11-01 16:27:11 by waffle waffle
I think you could safely fit this in a 512b compressed elf. That might actually be slightly challenging though, unlike sticking some source code in a shell script and relying on development libraries being present... I really dislike this self-compiling trick. It's unimaginative and a step back in my opinion.
It speaks volumes about Linux though where every software package is dependent on 50 other packages and their dev libs just because it needs some little header somewhere.
added on the 2008-11-01 16:44:55 by El Topo El Topo
Well yeah, I do agree that the library scheme can quickly get just ridicilous and lame.

But SDL is something -everyone- have. Compiling tools is something -everyone- except Ubuntu users who haven't installed them have.

Very few of the Windows tiny intros have I actually got working on either of my Windows comps.

But the Linux intros and demos I've done work on almost everyone and even if they don't, will work with just minor hacks :)
added on the 2008-11-01 18:26:51 by tzaeru tzaeru
tzareu: gcc isn't a default package for opensuse series either. you have to add it yourself.
Then I'll simply say that OpenSuse sucks. Suuuuuuuuucks.

Suuucks hooorrribly.
added on the 2008-11-02 05:48:50 by tzaeru tzaeru
Sucks, if someone did yet get it.
added on the 2008-11-02 11:56:16 by tzaeru tzaeru
sucks added on the 2008-11-02 17:39:44 by evil evil
sucks added on the 2008-11-02 23:15:26 by iks iks
sucks added on the 2008-11-03 11:23:49 by gloom gloom
mnmb
sucks added on the 2008-11-08 00:59:42 by quisten quisten
parhautta
rulez added on the 2008-11-29 14:48:03 by nosfe nosfe
nice hack
rulez added on the 2009-01-18 19:22:27 by T$ T$
nice glop
rulez added on the 2009-01-22 22:18:34 by RRROAR RRROAR
nice thumb down.
sucks added on the 2009-01-22 22:25:19 by v3nom v3nom
glöp
sucks added on the 2009-02-16 08:51:37 by Sir Sir
i like the trick but not the result so its a piggy from me.
added on the 2009-02-26 08:41:22 by auld auld
meh.
added on the 2009-02-26 13:21:58 by Preacher Preacher
THAT'S AMAZING !
sucks added on the 2009-03-13 02:32:54 by zoolum zoolum
idiot
added on the 2009-03-13 03:02:33 by cxnull cxnull
yay
rulez added on the 2009-03-28 21:59:12 by miiro miiro
AT LEAST IT AIN'T NO XOR TEXTURE
rulez added on the 2009-03-28 22:02:55 by PENETRATOR PENETRATOR
yes
rulez added on the 2009-07-03 04:07:11 by xteraco xteraco
as tzaeru would say: gathering glöps
sucks added on the 2009-09-25 14:16:15 by Saga Musix Saga Musix
HTeL
sucks added on the 2010-04-09 15:32:16 by relias abardon relias abardon
THAT'S GRATE
rulez added on the 2011-08-25 06:21:08 by provod provod
I don't understand why so many people have taken issue with self-compilation. Is it really that *radically* different from making calls to a 500k OGL lib and calling it a 1k intro? Unless you're coding DOS intros, you're relying on a lot more code than the executable size leads on to. I don't see it as much of a departure to rely on a compiler as well (at least under Linux).

That being said, I think this could have been a lot better. The visuals are pretty lack luster. I think it'd be possible to cram a lot more into a 256b self compiling prod. There are a few tricks I can think of that weren't utilized. Thumb for taking the time to implementing the idea.
rulez added on the 2012-01-09 01:19:50 by orby orby
The effort in making this was minimal - only thing we spent more than 10 seconds thinking of was the packing/unpacking shell script in the beginning of the code.

With sound, there's also http://pouet.net/prod.php?which=51725 which saw similar (lack of) effort towards creating it and features less optimized packing and unpacking stubs.
added on the 2012-03-14 11:06:39 by tzaeru tzaeru

submit changes

if this prod is a fake, some info is false or the download link is broken,

do not post about it in the comments, it will get lost.

instead, click here !

[previous edits]

add a comment