Flash MOD Player

David Shaw, 4:37 am 9th June 2009
Posted under: Blog Babble

In the same vein as the last post, I’d like to make note of Flash MOD Player v1.2, written in haXe by Kostas Michalopoulos a.k.a. Bad Sector. I have been meaning to make a few retro arcade games in Flash, but the lack of support for a tracker format was bugging me. With a MOD player, this will help provide that old school feel while also keeping downloads small.

I haven’t yet played around much with this MOD player as I’ve put Flash aside for the moment, but I’ll be looking at this closer when I pick it up again. In the meantime, if you work in Flash and are interested in tracker music, this player might be handy.



5 comments for “Flash MOD Player”

  1. nerd_boy says:

    If you’re planning on doing these “mini-reviews” a good bit, might want to put them in their own category. >_>

  2. David Shaw says:

    I don’t know – I’m not sure if random posts on stuff I find interesting warrant its own category. If it makes sense in the future I’ll make a new category and go and shift them all across. For now, “Blog Babble” will do, since it’s basically the same as Miscellaneous.

  3. Olivier Hamel says:

    Ok, since I was quick enough to catch you before you started using that horrible thing called python here are a few reasons:

    1 – It’s dead slow, and it’s bloated:
    http://gmarceau.qc.ca/blog/uploaded_images/size-vs-speed-vs-depandability.png
    Here’s a graph of a huge number of languages. ‘Spiders’ represent a set of tests, the center of the spider is it’s average performance/code size. Points on the left are fast, on the right are slow, at the top are code-bloated, at the bottom are small & elegant. You’ll find python as the bottom right hand corner of the table (check it’s graph). Now look at Lua, it’s as fast(er) than Psyco, which is Python-JIT. Look at LuaJIT, it’s as fast or faster than C#. Look at the code size of both, this + speed should be more than enough reasons to ditch python.

    2 – Really, really, REALLY dumb syntax:
    You are _forced_ to use tab-based indentation for defining scope. That’s all you need to know really. A language which FORCES you to indent (and with tabs only!) is just moronic. Yes, indenting is a good idea, but requiring it is just moronic.

    3 – Unsafe/inelegant:
    Lua has an explicit paradigm for insuring ‘safety’. No matter what you do, no matter how _WRONG_, all errors can be explain purely by Lua terms (no machine dependent-crap). IDK if Python has that, but I seriously doubt it (stringing bad design ideas together seem to be their overruling paradigm).

    Conclusion:
    Python sucks. Bad. Real bad. It’s slow, inelegant, bloated, unsafe and it’s got an un-cool name (icing on the cake). Lua is the complete opposite, and it’s blindingly fast. It’s not funny how fast it is, and it’s JIT version is as fast or faster than C#/Java (and far more elegant).

    http://www.lua.org

  4. Olivier Hamel says:

    Oops, ‘was*n’t* quick enough’. My mistake!

  5. David Shaw says:

    Yup, you weren’t quick enough. I started using Python about a year ago. ;) (I only started looking at it for games lately, previously I was using it for algorithm prototypes).

    The main strength of Python IMO is that it is very quick and easy to write code in. It’s been built to be very friendly to add libraries to, and has a good community behind it. It’s the perfect language for writing simple scripts in – I’ve got a Python script to automatically generate palettes for the GIMP, for example. Because of this, Python is my main contender as the language for tool development and various other in-house stuff.

    For game development, I’m mainly interested in Python for that quick-to-write-code ability. Speed isn’t really as much of an issue, as I can rewrite any speed sensitive stuff in C. That would be the case using any scripting language.

    As for the fixed formatting style, it was a pain when I was first learning, but the default Python style was only very slightly different from my preferred C programming style anyway. It isn’t that hard to get used to. It has the big benefit that all Python code is formatted the same, which makes reading other people’s code a lot easier.

    I’m not entirely sure what your third point is, as I know only the very basic amount of Lua, but I’m pretty sure Python is self-contained and machine independent.

    All that said (well, written), I’m planning on trialling Lua very shortly. The “feel” I get from Python is that it will work very well as a main programming language with libraries written in C, but after some thinking about my system design I’m leaning towards going with a C base with a scripting language for extensions. From what I know, Lua excels for that role. I also like minimilism from a sort of aesthetic principle (plus there’s less that can go wrong!), so I’d like to see how Lua goes as an embedded language.

    So fear not – I’m planning on trialling both. It’s the only way I could get a proper feel on what is best for my own personal style.


Leave a Reply