missiles with parabolic paths for Magnant (C language).

[mohydine]

Hi,

I am trying to implement some parabolic trajectories for the missiles
used in the game Magnant (http://www.insectwar.com) . It would enable
Ants to shoot more realistic arrows to other ants.

Right now ants are shooting point to point arrows, that follow along a
straight path (a line).

I am wondering if anybody knows a good algorithm or a good formula for
implementing this?

The GPL code is currently written like this ( stratagus engine v1.18 ):

I can send the complete .C if necessary.

int dx;

int dy;

int xstep;

int ystep;

int i;

if( !(missile->State&1) ) {

// initialize

dy=missile->DY-missile->Y;

ystep=1;

if( dy<0 ) {

dy=-dy;

ystep=-1;

}

dx=missile->DX-missile->X;

xstep=1;

if( dx<0 ) {

dx=-dx;

xstep=-1;

}

// FIXME: could be better written

if( missile->Type->Class == MissileClassWhirlwind

|| missile->Type->Class == MissileClassFlameShield ) {

// must not call MissileNewHeading nor frame change

} else if( missile->Type->Class == MissileClassBlizzard ) {

missile->SpriteFrame = 0;

} else if( missile->Type->Class == MissileClassPointToPoint3Bounces ) {

missile->DX-=xstep*TileSizeX/2;

missile->DY-=ystep*TileSizeY/2;

} else {

MissileNewHeadingFromXY(missile,dx*xstep,dy*ystep) ;

}

if( dy==0 ) { // horizontal line

if( dx==0 ) {

return 1;

}

} else if( dx==0 ) { // vertical line

} else if( dx<dy ) { // step in vertical direction

missile->D=dy-1;

dx+=dx;

dy+=dy;

} else if( dx>dy ) { // step in horizontal direction

missile->D=dx-1;

dx+=dx;

dy+=dy;

}

missile->Dx=dx;

missile->Dy=dy;

missile->Xstep=xstep;

missile->Ystep=ystep;

++missile->State;

DebugLevel3Fn("Init: %d,%d, %d,%d, =%d\n"

_C_ dx _C_ dy _C_ xstep _C_ ystep _C_ missile->D);

return 0;

} else {

// on the way

dx=missile->Dx;

dy=missile->Dy;

xstep=missile->Xstep;

ystep=missile->Ystep;

}

//

// Move missile

//

if( dy==0 ) { // horizontal line

for( i=0; i<missile->Type->Speed; ++i ) {

if( missile->X==missile->DX ) {

return 1;

}

missile->X+=xstep;

}

return 0;

}

if( dx==0 ) { // vertical line

for( i=0; i<missile->Type->Speed; ++i ) {

if( missile->Y==missile->DY ) {

return 1;

}

missile->Y+=ystep;

}

return 0;

}



if( dx<dy ) { // step in vertical direction

for( i=0; i<missile->Type->Speed; ++i ) {

if( missile->Y==missile->DY ) {

return 1;

}

missile->Y+=ystep;

missile->D-=dx;

if( missile->D<0 ) {

missile->D+=dy;

missile->X+=xstep;

}

}

return 0;

}

if( dx>dy ) { // step in horizontal direction

for( i=0; i<missile->Type->Speed; ++i ) {

if( missile->X==missile->DX ) {

return 1;

}

missile->X+=xstep;

missile->D-=dy;

if( missile->D<0 ) {

missile->D+=dx;

missile->Y+=ystep;

}

}

return 0;

}

// diagonal line

for( i=0; i<missile->Type->Speed; ++i ) {

if( missile->Y==missile->DY ) {

return 1;

}

missile->X+=xstep;

missile->Y+=ystep;

}

return 0;



Mohydine
--
Posted via http://dbforums.com

[Joona I Palaste]

mohydine <me*********@dbforums.com> scribbled the following:

Hi, I am trying to implement some parabolic trajectories for the missiles
used in the game Magnant (http://www.insectwar.com) . It would enable
Ants to shoot more realistic arrows to other ants. Right now ants are shooting point to point arrows, that follow along a
straight path (a line). I am wondering if anybody knows a good algorithm or a good formula for
implementing this? The GPL code is currently written like this ( stratagus engine v1.18 ):

(snip code)

The code you posted was in a very unreadable format. Please don't
insert gratuitous blank lines between source code lines (there seemed
to be 2 blank lines between *every* line of your code), and please,
please, pretty please, learn to indent. Non-indented source code
becomes unreadable pretty soon after it advances past "Hello world"
level.

--
/-- Joona Palaste (pa*****@cc.helsinki.fi) ---------------------------\
| Kingpriest of "The Flying Lemon Tree" G++ FR FW+ M- #108 D+ ADA N+++|
| http://www.helsinki.fi/~palaste W++ B OP+ |
\----------------------------------------- Finland rules! ------------/
"You can pick your friends, you can pick your nose, but you can't pick your
relatives."
- MAD Magazine

[Richard Heathfield]

mohydine wrote:

Hi,

I am trying to implement some parabolic trajectories for the missiles
used in the game Magnant (http://www.insectwar.com) . It would enable
Ants to shoot more realistic arrows to other ants.

Right now ants are shooting point to point arrows, that follow along a
straight path (a line).

I am wondering if anybody knows a good algorithm or a good formula for
implementing this?

Let the arrow be fired with an initial velocity V, and an initial angle of
alpha radians from the horizontal, in a gravitational field accelerating
falling bodies at g.

Its initial upward velocity is V sin alpha, and its sideways velocity V cos
alpha. If you ignore air resistance, it'll keep going sideways until it
hits something. Its upward velocity decreases by g each second.

Take it from there.
--
Richard Heathfield : bi****@eton.powernet.co.uk
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton

[Bertrand Mollinier Toublet]

Richard Heathfield wrote:

mohydine wrote:

Hi,

I am trying to implement some parabolic trajectories for the missiles
used in the game Magnant (http://www.insectwar.com) . It would enable
Ants to shoot more realistic arrows to other ants.

Right now ants are shooting point to point arrows, that follow along a
straight path (a line).

I am wondering if anybody knows a good algorithm or a good formula for
implementing this?

Let the arrow be fired with an initial velocity V, and an initial angle of
alpha radians from the horizontal, in a gravitational field accelerating
falling bodies at g.

Its initial upward velocity is V sin alpha, and its sideways velocity V cos
alpha. If you ignore air resistance, it'll keep going sideways until it
hits something. Its upward velocity decreases by g each second.

Take it from there.

Richard,

I'd like to allow myself to quote you: "This is a wonderful answer. It's
off-topic, it's incorrect, and it doesn't answer the question." :-)

(Un)fortunately, your answer is correct enough. It is just off-topic and
doesn't really answer the question (in that, IMHO, it is not all that
helpful for an algorithm). I guess we'll have to settle to qualify it as
only "good" instead of wonderful.

If you liked physics as much as I did, I can understand why you could
not resist the urge to show off what you knew, but don't you think it
deserved to at least be flagged as OT, let alone cross-posted and fu2 to
sci.physics.shooting-arrows or something ?

Ah well... don't mind me...
--
Bertrand Mollinier Toublet
Currently looking for employment in the San Francisco Bay Area
http://www.bmt.dnsalias.org/employment

[Mark McIntyre]

On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:38:36 -0400, in comp.lang.c , mohydine
<me*********@dbforums.com> wrote:

Hi,

I am trying to implement some parabolic trajectories for the missiles
used in the game Magnant (http://www.insectwar.com) . It would enable
Ants to shoot more realistic arrows to other ants.

I am wondering if anybody knows a good algorithm or a good formula for
implementing this?

Virtually any A level maths student or physical science undergrad
wouild know an algo for this. In fact you could could look up the
formula for the parabola in pretty much any textbook. This is not a C
question.

<snip unreadable code>

When you're posting from web-based sources, you need to remember that
they almost certainly screw up your line endings. In your case, the
cut-paste resulted in every CR being translated into CRLF and every LF
_also_ being translated into CRLF.

--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>

[Richard Heathfield]

Bertrand Mollinier Toublet wrote:

<extremely elementary projectiles stuff snipped>

Richard,

I'd like to allow myself to quote you: "This is a wonderful answer. It's
off-topic, it's incorrect, and it doesn't answer the question." :-)

(Un)fortunately, your answer is correct enough.
That's a relief.
It is just off-topic and
doesn't really answer the question (in that, IMHO, it is not all that
helpful for an algorithm).
It was intended to set the OP thinking. I /could/ have scribbled out the C
code for him, but that would have been "doing the homework", which I was
loathe to do. I was hoping to get him to realise that he's gonna have to
think about this.
I guess we'll have to settle to qualify it as
only "good" instead of wonderful.
<grin>

If you liked physics as much as I did, I can understand why you could
not resist the urge to show off what you knew,
Oh, but I /did/ resist. I was all set to show him how to calculate time of
flight, height at a given time, maximising range whilst taking air
resistance into account, and heaven knows what else; but I managed to
prevent myself from doing this, on the grounds that it would teach him
little about projectiles but much about free lunches.
but don't you think it
deserved to at least be flagged as OT, let alone cross-posted and fu2 to
sci.physics.shooting-arrows or something ?

It didn't occur to me, to be honest with you. Sorry about that.

--
Richard Heathfield : bi****@eton.powernet.co.uk
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton

[nrk]

Bertrand Mollinier Toublet wrote:

<snip>

I'd like to allow myself to quote you: "This is a wonderful answer. It's
off-topic, it's incorrect, and it doesn't answer the question." :-)

(Un)fortunately, your answer is correct enough. It is just off-topic and
doesn't really answer the question (in that, IMHO, it is not all that
helpful for an algorithm). I guess we'll have to settle to qualify it as
only "good" instead of wonderful.

If you liked physics as much as I did, I can understand why you could
not resist the urge to show off what you knew, but don't you think it
deserved to at least be flagged as OT, let alone cross-posted and fu2 to
sci.physics.shooting-arrows or something ?

Ah well... don't mind me...

Actually, it is a pretty reasonable answer (OT, but reasonable). All the OP
needs to do is recollect some high-school physics that says
s = ut + 0.5 at^2, s being distance, u being initial velocity, a being
acceleration and t being time, to simulate the x and y co-ords. of the
projectile.

-nrk.

[mohydine]

HI all,

First thanks for your answers. Unfortunately, this is not helping me a
lot.

As you suggested, I used simple parabolic formula, w/o using t, but
using a simple y=f(x).

x=x+step;

so y=yo+Cst*Sqrt[(x-xm)^2-(xo-xm)^2];

where (xo,yo) is starting point, xm is such that dy(xm) /dx=0.

I can get xm from

Xd=missile->DX; // impact of the missile X

Yd=missile->DY; // impact of the missile Y

Xo=missile->SourceX; //Source missile X

Yo=missile->SourceY; //Source missile Y

then

Xm=(-1/Cst*(Yd-Yo)*(Yd-Yo)+Xd*Xd-Xo*Xo)/(2*(Xd-Xo));

Since I know which parabola I am going to use(3 parameters known)

it works fine if yD(destination(impact of missible))= y0, but I can't
have it working when yd<yo. Even if I know my 3 parameters formula

any idea? Mathematically, I can't find the problem. So that is why I am
wondering if this has something to do with the C implementation or
something else.

Sorry for posting so much code.

Mohydine
--
Posted via http://dbforums.com

[Rajasekar Ramakrishnan]

hi,
i am actually new to c.l.c
and i happen to read lots of mails in this newsgroup

and the very bad part of this newsgroup
is that ppl start to hurt a newbie, if the person asks for a very basic doubt

and that too, joona i palaste, if i could see ur mails i could only
know that you do not provide solutions
but mostly ask people to not send basic doubts to this comp.lang.c

i think the news readers need to be more professional, not all of them

please try to help a novice or if not, keep mum , so that he is not
discouraged

rajasekar.

Joona I Palaste wrote:

mohydine <me*********@dbforums.com> scribbled the following:

Hi,

I am trying to implement some parabolic trajectories for the missiles
used in the game Magnant (http://www.insectwar.com) . It would enable
Ants to shoot more realistic arrows to other ants.

Right now ants are shooting point to point arrows, that follow along a
straight path (a line).

I am wondering if anybody knows a good algorithm or a good formula for
implementing this?

The GPL code is currently written like this ( stratagus engine v1.18 ):

(snip code)

The code you posted was in a very unreadable format. Please don't
insert gratuitous blank lines between source code lines (there seemed
to be 2 blank lines between *every* line of your code), and please,
please, pretty please, learn to indent. Non-indented source code
becomes unreadable pretty soon after it advances past "Hello world"
level.

--
/-- Joona Palaste (pa*****@cc.helsinki.fi) ---------------------------\
| Kingpriest of "The Flying Lemon Tree" G++ FR FW+ M- #108 D+ ADA N+++|
| http://www.helsinki.fi/~palaste W++ B OP+ |
\----------------------------------------- Finland rules! ------------/
"You can pick your friends, you can pick your nose, but you can't pick your
relatives."
- MAD Magazine

[Joona I Palaste]

Rajasekar Ramakrishnan <ra*********************@adcc.alcatel.be> scribbled the following:

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------8ABFF92D41955E546EDA90A4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Don't do that.
hi,
i am actually new to c.l.c
and i happen to read lots of mails in this newsgroup and the very bad part of this newsgroup
is that ppl start to hurt a newbie, if the person asks for a very basic doubt
Expressing criticism is not hurting. Did you see me insult or flame the
OP anywhere?
and that too, joona i palaste, if i could see ur mails i could only
know that you do not provide solutions
but mostly ask people to not send basic doubts to this comp.lang.c
Did you see me ask the OP not to send basic doubts anywhere? All I
said that he should reformat the code better.
i think the news readers need to be more professional, not all of them please try to help a novice or if not, keep mum , so that he is not
discouraged

Which would mean that if the OP's code was bad, we shouldn't have to
tell him that, because it would hurt his feelings and scar him
emotionally. Thus he wouldn't know that his code could be better, and
go on writing bad code. That doesn't fit in with my vision of the world.

You seem to be mistaking telling someone "you are not the greatest
coder to walk this Earth (yet)" with telling him "you are a pathetic
loser". I was doing the former, not the latter.

PS. Please don't top-post. Thanks.

(v-card snipped)

--
/-- Joona Palaste (pa*****@cc.helsinki.fi) ---------------------------\
| Kingpriest of "The Flying Lemon Tree" G++ FR FW+ M- #108 D+ ADA N+++|
| http://www.helsinki.fi/~palaste W++ B OP+ |
\----------------------------------------- Finland rules! ------------/
"You could take his life and..."
- Mirja Tolsa

[Daniel Haude]

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 12:05:20 +0530,
Rajasekar Ramakrishnan <ra*********************@adcc.alcatel.be> wrote
in Msg. <3F***************@adcc.alcatel.be>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
....which is something we don't like to see on Usenet.
and the very bad part of this newsgroup
is that ppl start to hurt a newbie, if the person asks for a very basic doubt
and that too, joona i palaste, if i could see ur mails i could only
know that you do not provide solutions
but mostly ask people to not send basic doubts to this comp.lang.c
He didn't do that. He merely told the OP that he'd like to see more
legible code, and quite politely so:

The code you posted was in a very unreadable format. Please don't
insert gratuitous blank lines between source code lines (there seemed
to be 2 blank lines between *every* line of your code), and please,
please, pretty please, learn to indent. Non-indented source code
becomes unreadable pretty soon after it advances past "Hello world"
level.

please try to help a novice or if not, keep mum , so that he is not
discouraged

If the novice can't deal with polite criticism, that's his problem. I
mean, what do you expect -- most novices obviously haven't read the Usenet
netiquette (like you, by the way), let alone the C FAQ.

It's rude to post into a C language Usenet group not having done your
homework and knowing zilch about either C or Usenet. It's not rude to
politely criticize such behavior.

And please lay off top-posting.

--Daniel

--
"With me is nothing wrong! And with you?" (from r.a.m.p)

[Randy Howard]

In article <33****************@dbforums.com>, me*********@dbforums.com
says...

I am trying to implement some parabolic trajectories for the missiles
used in the game Magnant (http://www.insectwar.com) . It would enable
Ants to shoot more realistic arrows to other ants.

I snipped the code, because it was unreadable, as already pointed out
to you. If you really want it to be be accurate, I would recommend a
book called "Understanding Firearm Ballistics" by Robert A. Rinker.
The subject also applies pretty well to missiles, particularly if you
focus on the external ballistics section and disregard the internal stuff
like chamber pressure, twist rates, gyroscopic drift (assuming your
missile isn't spinning it won't have an effect), powders, primers,
temperature, etc. You probably can also disregard the terminal
ballistics portion (what happens to the object that gets hit by the
bullet). It includes drag, wind deflection and all the trajectory
info you can imagine.

--
Randy Howard _o
2reply remove FOOBAR \<,
______________________()/ ()______________________________________________
SCO Spam-magnet: po********@sco.com

[Lawrence V. Cipriani]

In article <hi********************************@4ax.com>,
Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.net> wrote:

On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:38:36 -0400, in comp.lang.c , mohydine
<me*********@dbforums.com> wrote:

I am trying to implement some parabolic trajectories for the missiles
used in the game Magnant (http://www.insectwar.com) . It would enable
Ants to shoot more realistic arrows to other ants.

I am wondering if anybody knows a good algorithm or a good formula for
implementing this?

Virtually any A level maths student or physical science undergrad
wouild know an algo for this. In fact you could could look up the
formula for the parabola in pretty much any textbook. This is not a C
question.

Search for a free exterior ballistics program. It would be a lot more
realistic than a simple parabolic curve.

[Mark McIntyre]

On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 18:18:45 -0500, in comp.lang.c , nrk
<nr*******@hotmail.com> wrote:

Actually, it is a pretty reasonable answer (OT, but reasonable). All the OP
needs to do is recollect some high-school physics that says
s = ut + 0.5 at^2, s being distance, u being initial velocity, a being
acceleration and t being time, to simulate the x and y co-ords. of the
projectile.

Helps if you can remember how to rotate a frame of reference too, so
you can normalise the equations wrt the straight line joining the two
objects, even when they're in relative motion..
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>

[Mark McIntyre]

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 12:05:20 +0530, in comp.lang.c , Rajasekar
Ramakrishnan <ra*********************@adcc.alcatel.be> wrote:

and the very bad part of this newsgroup
is that ppl start to hurt a newbie, if the person asks for a very basic doubt
I realise that english is not your first language, but a douby is not
the same as a question.
and that too, joona i palaste, if i could see ur mails i could only
know that you do not provide solutions

but the purpose of this group is NOT to give people the answer to
their problem so that they don't havae to think, but to help them
solve it themselves. Nor is it to answer questions about mathematics.
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>

[Daniel Haude]

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 21:42:32 +0100,
Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.net> wrote
in Msg. <j3********************************@4ax.com>

I realise that english is not your first language, but a douby is not
the same as a question.

Damn right fifteen! Doubylessy.

--Daniel

--
"With me is nothing wrong! And with you?" (from r.a.m.p)

[WA Support]

Hello,

You might want to look at one of these:

A favorite: Numerical Recipes in C.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...529691-5952103

which I find more useful than
Numerical Algorithms in C.
http://www.springer-ny.com/detail.tp...SBN=3540605304
which is reviewed (not too favorably) here
http://www.accu.org/bookreviews/publ.../n/n002066.htm

BTW: accu.org is the Association of C & C++ Users

Murrah Boswell
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:38:36 -0400, mohydine
<me*********@dbforums.com> wrote:

Hi,

I am trying to implement some parabolic trajectories for the missiles
used in the game Magnant (http://www.insectwar.com) . It would enable
Ants to shoot more realistic arrows to other ants.

Right now ants are shooting point to point arrows, that follow along a
straight path (a line).

I am wondering if anybody knows a good algorithm or a good formula for
implementing this?

The GPL code is currently written like this ( stratagus engine v1.18 ):

I can send the complete .C if necessary.

int dx;

int dy;

int xstep;

int ystep;

int i;

if( !(missile->State&1) ) {

// initialize

dy=missile->DY-missile->Y;

ystep=1;

if( dy<0 ) {

dy=-dy;

ystep=-1;

}

dx=missile->DX-missile->X;

xstep=1;

if( dx<0 ) {

dx=-dx;

xstep=-1;

}

// FIXME: could be better written

if( missile->Type->Class == MissileClassWhirlwind

|| missile->Type->Class == MissileClassFlameShield ) {

// must not call MissileNewHeading nor frame change

} else if( missile->Type->Class == MissileClassBlizzard ) {

missile->SpriteFrame = 0;

} else if( missile->Type->Class == MissileClassPointToPoint3Bounces ) {

missile->DX-=xstep*TileSizeX/2;

missile->DY-=ystep*TileSizeY/2;

} else {

MissileNewHeadingFromXY(missile,dx*xstep,dy*ystep );

}

if( dy==0 ) { // horizontal line

if( dx==0 ) {

return 1;

}

} else if( dx==0 ) { // vertical line

} else if( dx<dy ) { // step in vertical direction

missile->D=dy-1;

dx+=dx;

dy+=dy;

} else if( dx>dy ) { // step in horizontal direction

missile->D=dx-1;

dx+=dx;

dy+=dy;

}

missile->Dx=dx;

missile->Dy=dy;

missile->Xstep=xstep;

missile->Ystep=ystep;

++missile->State;

DebugLevel3Fn("Init: %d,%d, %d,%d, =%d\n"

_C_ dx _C_ dy _C_ xstep _C_ ystep _C_ missile->D);

return 0;

} else {

// on the way

dx=missile->Dx;

dy=missile->Dy;

xstep=missile->Xstep;

ystep=missile->Ystep;

}

//

// Move missile

//

if( dy==0 ) { // horizontal line

for( i=0; i<missile->Type->Speed; ++i ) {

if( missile->X==missile->DX ) {

return 1;

}

missile->X+=xstep;

}

return 0;

}

if( dx==0 ) { // vertical line

for( i=0; i<missile->Type->Speed; ++i ) {

if( missile->Y==missile->DY ) {

return 1;

}

missile->Y+=ystep;

}

return 0;

}



if( dx<dy ) { // step in vertical direction

for( i=0; i<missile->Type->Speed; ++i ) {

if( missile->Y==missile->DY ) {

return 1;

}

missile->Y+=ystep;

missile->D-=dx;

if( missile->D<0 ) {

missile->D+=dy;

missile->X+=xstep;

}

}

return 0;

}

if( dx>dy ) { // step in horizontal direction

for( i=0; i<missile->Type->Speed; ++i ) {

if( missile->X==missile->DX ) {

return 1;

}

missile->X+=xstep;

missile->D-=dy;

if( missile->D<0 ) {

missile->D+=dx;

missile->Y+=ystep;

}

}

return 0;

}

// diagonal line

for( i=0; i<missile->Type->Speed; ++i ) {

if( missile->Y==missile->DY ) {

return 1;

}

missile->X+=xstep;

missile->Y+=ystep;

}

return 0;



Mohydine
--
Posted via http://dbforums.com

[Alex]

WA Support <su*****@wildapache.net> wrote:

Hello, You might want to look at one of these:

<snip>

Seriously, stop top-posting. Also, please trim parts of the original
message which are not relevant to your reply.

Alex

[WA Support]

Top posting was a direct response to the original question, and I
gave him useful information instead of all the anal ankle biting.

Murrah Boswell

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 23:08:30 GMT, Alex <al*******@hotmail.com> wrote:

WA Support <su*****@wildapache.net> wrote:

Hello,

You might want to look at one of these:

<snip>

Seriously, stop top-posting. Also, please trim parts of the original
message which are not relevant to your reply.

Alex

[Alex]

<rearranged>

WA Support <su*****@wildapache.net> wrote:

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 23:08:30 GMT, Alex <al*******@hotmail.com> wrote:

WA Support <su*****@wildapache.net> wrote:

Hello,

You might want to look at one of these:

<snip>

Seriously, stop top-posting. Also, please trim parts of the original
message which are not relevant to your reply.

Top posting was a direct response to the original question, and I
gave him useful information instead of all the anal ankle biting.

I think that you are failing to grasp the concepts of top-posting
and bottom-posting. Take a look at this message, then take a look
at your previous message. If you still don't get it, I can't help
you.

Alex

[Jeff]

"WA Support" <su*****@wildapache.net> wrote in message
news:3f*****************@news.wildapache.net...

Top posting was a direct response to the original question, and I
gave him useful information instead of all the anal ankle biting.

[snip]

Although you want to give help to the OP, you should not top-posting.

Top-posting is bad in usenet. If you just want to give out your answer, you
can simply delete the lines written by OP.

Discussion on "top-posting"
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html

--
Jeff
-je6543 at yahoo.com

[Randy Howard]

In article <3f*****************@news.wildapache.net>,
su*****@wildapache.net says...

Hello,

You might want to look at one of these:
a 540 line quoted post to say this? [snip is fairly cheap]
A favorite: Numerical Recipes in C.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...529691-5952103

Yes, some of the most widely disrespected C code available in book form,
outside of Schildt. The math information isn't all bad, but the
implementation is suspect.

[Richard Heathfield]

WA Support wrote:

Top posting was a direct response to the original question,
So why include the whole of the original text?
and I
gave him useful information

Did you? You told him about "Numerical Recipes", I think, yes? Well, I have
a copy (second edition). Could you please provide me with the number of the
page or pages that you think constitute a useful guide to implementing
projectiles equations in C? I've looked, but I can't find anything
relevant.
instead of all the anal ankle biting.

I bow to your clearly superior experience of anatomically implausible
behaviour.

--
Richard Heathfield : bi****@eton.powernet.co.uk
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton

[Mark McIntyre]

On 18 Sep 2003 22:43:52 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Daniel Haude
<ha***@physnet.uni-hamburg.de> wrote:

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 21:42:32 +0100,
Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.net> wrote
in Msg. <j3********************************@4ax.com>

I realise that english is not your first language, but a douby is not
the same as a question.

Damn right fifteen! Doubylessy.

Grin. There's some name or other for that law isn't there ?

--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>

[Mark McIntyre]

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 23:34:08 GMT, in comp.lang.c ,
su*****@wildapache.net (WA Support) wrote:

Top posting was a direct response to the original question,
what the fsck does that have to do with the price of fish? Don't
blasted well top post in CLC.
and I
gave him useful information instead of all the anal ankle biting.

Good to pass on useful information. Bad to get antsy about doing it
wrongly.
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>

[Mark McIntyre]

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 06:56:17 +0000 (UTC), in comp.lang.c , Richard
Heathfield <do******@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

instead of all the anal ankle biting.

I bow to your clearly superior experience of anatomically implausible
behaviour.

I feel sorry for those poor midlanders who had an analanklectomy in
childhood, it must hold them back terribly. I find mine most useful
for putting my sock into to muffle my screams, in management meetings
where the PHB is propounding the latest Management Theorem.
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>

[Mark McIntyre]

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 23:04:36 GMT, in comp.lang.c ,
su*****@wildapache.net (WA Support) wrote:

Hello,

You might want to look at one of these:

A favorite: Numerical Recipes in C.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...529691-5952103

you might want to bear in mind that the actual C code in this book is
universally hideous. Unless you hae the more recent version, the
writers even failed to understand how to swap from fortran's 1-based
arrays safely. Run away, terribly fast.

--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>