AEGISUB CHANGE END TIME TO FOR MAC
AEGISUB CHANGE END TIME TO FULL
AEGISUB CHANGE END TIME TO CODE
AEGISUB CHANGE END TIME TO TV
AEGISUB CHANGE END TIME TO DOWNLOAD

AEGISUB CHANGE END TIME TO TV

(Actually CRT TV screens are even worse.) or why you should not use animation on the s override tag.ĭo you know what font hinting is? If you haven't worked with digital typography you might not, but it's a technique used by (almost) all font rendering systems to make vector fonts (such as True Type, Open Type and Adobe Type 1) appear better on low-resolution mediums like computer monitors.

AEGISUB CHANGE END TIME TO FOR MAC

Quite useful if you're building for Mac yourself! Yes I used it for this build.) It's called make-app-bundle.sh and can create Application bundles.

(But oh, by the way, I have added a new script to the SVN repository. There's no ETA for the next useful version. Of course it's also possible to make an Intel version and it shouldn't be a major problem to lipo them together, I just haven't bothered to try yet. This is just a proof of concept, it is (still) possible to get Aegisub on Mac and PPC.Īlso, while it does run on Intel machines, it's quite slow, especially during startup, as it's not a Universal binary but a PPC-only one. I know it's horrible and useless and I'll try to make something better. Remember: You have no right to complain about this build.

AEGISUB CHANGE END TIME TO DOWNLOAD

If you really want to try it anyway, here's a download link: aegisub-mac-r2486-stripped.zip. (The PCM WAV problem is due to endianness.) So far this build is essentially useless! It can't load video, can't load audio, has no Automation support, the libass build can't render anything (because Fontconfig is misconfigured) and even the PCM WAV audio provider that otherwise always works, won't. Tonight I managed to make my first running build of Aegisub for PPC (G4/G5) architecture which was (of course) the first thing people started screaming for when I put out my first Intel builds some time last year! We get asked 'what about the mac version?' once in a while and yes, it's the eternal problem.Īegisub can build on Mac and it can run, but unfortunately it's quite hard to make it useful, not to mention the numerous GUI bugs and glitches.

AEGISUB CHANGE END TIME TO CODE

To think that it's much easier to code this sort of thing in Meanwhile, I'll have to stick to writing that kind of abomination in Java. If Sun doesn't start fixing this sort of thing in Java, then Microsoft just might take the lead.

Indeed, it seems that C# is what Java SHOULD HAVE BEEN. I am aware that C# supports some (all?) of the above, but it doesn't as yet have as much portability as Java does. If Java is supposed to be a cleaner and easier version of C++, then why is it that writing that sort of code in Java is much harder and much less robust? While many programs don't suffer from those problems much, there are certain applications that become a true nightmare to write and maintain - physics simulations or anything to do with vectorial math are the obvious example (that's why I kept using 'Vector3f' classes above). (In case you're wondering, I also had to add a clone() to the set method, because otherwise the caller might call the set method, but keep the reference that it passed to it and modify it later.) Java offers no solution for this problem. What if, instead of a vector, it was an image? And what if it was accessed many times per second? This could quickly become impossibly slow. The second problem is that returning an entire copy might be SLOW. Since the user will have no way to tell if he's getting the actual position or a copy of it (unless he enters the original source or look in the documentation), he might try to modify the position that he got, and then be surprised that it doesn't work. There are two major problems with this: First, the previous code STILL COMPILES.

AEGISUB CHANGE END TIME TO FULL

In other words, you're now returning a full copy of the object. Private Vector3f position = new Vector3f() Since Java lacks this feature, you are forced to use annoying workarounds (such as keeping pools of objects) if performance becomes critical. Stack building makes this much faster, not to mention EASIER. In many situations, you will have to allocate many small temporary objects and then never use them again. Not only does it involve complex algorithms for determining WHERE to allocate the memory, but it also means that you're giving more work for the garbage collector when you're done with the object. For the rest of this post, I will write snippets in both C++ and in Java to illustrate the differences.Ĭreating objects on the heap is slow. Three, in particular, have always bothered me: stack building, operator overloading, and const-correctness. This is a mostly off-topic rant that is being posted because I know that a good portion of our user base is composed of programmers.Įver since I started working with Java, a few months ago, there have been many things that I have felt SHOULD be there, but aren't.

Aegisub change end time to