Luiz Eduardo Guida Valmont

Greenhorn
+ Follow
since Mar 23, 2009
Merit badge: grant badges
For More
Cows and Likes
Cows
Total received
0
In last 30 days
0
Total given
0
Likes
Total received
0
Received in last 30 days
0
Total given
0
Given in last 30 days
0
Forums and Threads
Scavenger Hunt
expand Ranch Hand Scavenger Hunt
expand Greenhorn Scavenger Hunt

Recent posts by Luiz Eduardo Guida Valmont

Hahaha

It goes to show I had no idea it was launched on PS3.

Still, the question remains, only this time around assuming a different game (that's yet to be ported).

Thanks, Malcolm.
12 years ago
Mario,

From Pac-Man to Metal Gear Solid. From the very first Zelda to Fallout 3. From Super Mario (no pun intended!) to Lara Croft.

Gaming has changed dramatically over the past couple of decades. We've seen Sonic, Mario and Link step back so Snake, Lara Croft, Drake and so many others take place. It took only a couple of hours to end Dr. Robotnik's evil plans. Now it takes a couple of days (weeks, maybe) to finally fight Zeus in God of War. What that means in my view is that the complexity of games have evolved just as hardware did. Still, I personally miss those games that were equally fun, where your avatar was a 2D sprite blittered on a plain surface/canvas. What about Tetris? Boy, that was *very* fun.

Gaming is evolving to kinda merge with movies (Uncharted, Tomb Raider, Fallout, Metal Gear Solid 4, etc), meaning they're morphing more into a interactive story-telling than a kill-the-evil-aliens-2-hour-entertaining-application. All in all, mobile devices recently became capable of supporting more robust, interesting games (Angry Birds, anyone?).

Enter Android.

On to the question (finally): what are your views on Android bringing back those kind of quick games, those you can play on the way to work or maybe on a plane while travelling? As a side question, do you think the console industry will react to that (say, porting Angry Birds to PS3)?

Thanks,
Luiz Valmont
12 years ago
Hello folks,

The Problem - A not so short intruduction

I'm working on an issue concerning excessive usage of java.lang.Thread. The solution is porting the uses of that class to the Work and WorkManager classes. There's one external system to which my application must talk and the interface is, not surprisingly, CORBA. That said, there's the time out issue. The old implementation used sleep'ing and interrupting to do that but the new one must not.

After some google'ing, I found that vbroker.orb.qos.relativeRTT seemed to be the answer I was looking for. That's when I stumbled upon this link (look for "CR5796"):

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:Kat4mnv8Yl8J:support.borland.com/entry.jspa%3FexternalID%3D4858+site:support.borland.com+borland+visibroker+4.5+tcpTimeout&cd=1&hl=pt-BR&ct=clnk&client=iceweasel-a

relativeRTT raising my thread count is not an option. I cannot cut the "pure" Thread usage for something that uses a lot of threads itself. Searching for "site:borland.com Case 606574" yields that link again.

I also found this:

http://techpubs.borland.com/am/visibroker/v80/en/VisiBroker_Doc_updates.htm

setting vbroker.orb.tcpTimeout to an Integer or a Long value yields an Exception-That-Must-Not-Be-Named (aka NullPointerException). Moreover, using deprecated stuff is not good in the long run.

The Question(s) - Finally

Does the issue as reported by "Case 606574" (high thread count when using relativeRTT) still holds? Does anyone have any proof or link on the issue? Does relativeRTT mean any, even a single, call to java.lang.Thread constructor?

If I'm not clear enough please bear with me and by all means tell me what you don't understand.
15 years ago