raptor-run VS openscad-graph-editor

Scripts: https://github.com/quiver-dev/raptor-run/tree/main/scripts

If anyone's looking for a quick intro to Godot 4, you can take a look at our video series: https://quiver.dev/tutorials/create-your-first-godot-4-game/. Disclaimer: this is offered by my company, but the tutorial is free and the code and assets are liberally licensed.

This move by Unity isn't completely unexpected if you've studied their financials. Smaller devs are basically dead weight for Unity, so it seemed like them putting the squeeze on them was just a matter of time. Bottom line: don't count on a public company to do the right thing if you're not helping their bottom line.

We have a free tutorial for Godot 4 that takes you from the start to a complete game in about two hours. You can find it here: https://quiver.dev/tutorials/create-your-first-godot-4-game/.

Disclaimer: I'm the founder of the company that produced this course, but the tutorial is free and the custom assets used in the tutorial are liberally licensed.

If you're looking for a simple, free intro to Godot 4, you can take a look at our course: https://quiver.dev/tutorials/create-your-first-godot-4-game/ (also on YouTube).

Hi all, I'm excited to share a few clips from Curse of the Tomb, the game we'll show you how to build from scratch in our first premium 2D course for Godot 4. This has been an exciting collaboration between two developers, an artist, and myself. The course will cover everything you need to know to create most platformer, Metroidvania, hack-and-slash, and side-scrolling RPG games. We're expecting the course to cover 10+ hours of content and will include beautiful assets we made just for this course. The course will be ready in a few months. The only prerequisite is some programming experience and understanding the concepts in our first course. Let me know what you think!

We have a free 2-hour course that takes you through the basics of Godot 4 to create a simple, but complete game: https://quiver.dev/tutorials/create-your-first-godot-4-game/ (or if you prefer YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZbXSd3dhiY&list=PLWoyLDmwvJl1ZY6DmsEJbgsAmJhAlPKG\_) The only requirement is some programming experience. We developed the course while Godot 4 was still in alpha, but we've noted where the code or interface has changed. Hope that helps! Disclaimer: I'm the founder of Quiver.

Happy new year, everyone! Here are the results of Quiver's first game jam, where we tasked participants to extend our [intro tutorial](https://quiver.dev/tutorials/create-your-first-godot-4-game/) in any way they wanted. We gave out cash prizes to the winners and donated money to Godot for every submission. It was a blast to play all the entries and our team was really surprised to see how people made the game their own. We're hoping to do another game jam in the beginning of February, so please join us at [quiver.dev](https://quiver.dev).

We have a free tutorial for Godot 4 that holds your hand from the basics to a complete infinite runner game. You should be able to get through it in an afternoon.

So, I'm playing around with https://quiver.dev/tutorials/create-your-first-godot-4-game/

I just finished the Quiver tutorial and is trying to gradually hack it into a game of my own. First obstacle: How to make the player move left and right when in the air.

The Cube was a gift, and the PS work didn't go that far.

I found PS pretty inscrutable, esp. the function-filled variant used in Virtuoso, but did manage to get dimension lines coded up (which promptly ran into precision problems which I eventually gave up on).

OpenSCAD is a lot more approachable, and METAPOST was easy to pick up and make use of:

http://ftp.tug.org/TUGboat/tb40-2/tb125adams-3d.pdf

Still working through this at:

https://willadams.gitbook.io/design-into-3d/3d-project

and mostly using visual tools (which arguably is limiting me) https://www.blockscad3d.com/editor/ and https://github.com/derkork/openscad-graph-editor and of course, had to throw: http://pythonscad.org/ into the mix. Still a bit miffed that Nodebox and Processing or maker.js weren't a good fit.

As a visual person (traditionally trained as a graphic artist), I've wanted this sort of thing for a long while, and I've been trying to use it for 3D.

Surprisingly, there are multiple specialized tools for this:

- https://www.blockscad3d.com --- an adaptation of Google's Blockly to OpenSCAD

- https://github.com/derkork/openscad-graph-editor --- wires and nodes, it has the advantage of exposing _all_ of OpenSCAD's commands (the above has a subset)

- https://github.com/Tanneguydv/Pythonocc-nodes-for-Ryven --- a module for using PythonOCC in Ryven --- when I finally succeeded, I found the language inscrutable, even when provided w/ quite nice examples (definitely a failing on my part, not that of the tool)

- https://github.com/graphscad/graphscad --- it took a long while for the source code for this to be made available, and for a while it had compatibility problems (why was "cube" redefined?) --- probably defunct for political reasons, it had some interesting ideas, in particular the ability to have custom icons for modules

- https://www.nodebox.net --- if memory serves I got hung up by not easily being able to do 3D, and when doing 2D having precision problems (or maybe that was Processing.org)

and I've been using these tools to make various things:

https://willadams.gitbook.io/design-into-3d/3d-project

(and maybe eventually I'll finish something)

The problem I've been running into is there doesn't seem to be an answer to the question:

"What does an algorithm look like?"

I recently had occasion to mention Herman Hesse's _The Glass Bead Game_ (also published as _Magister Ludi_) and I'll bring it up again --- what is a meaningful graphical representation of a program?

The Drakon folks argued that there should be one true path but that's not really communicative and I would note that if this was a simple thing it wouldn't be decades since I last saw a physical Flowcharting Template:

https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object-groups/flo...

(and it's pretty rare to even see a well-done electronic drawing of a flowchart since Visio made its splash and vanished into the bowels of Microsoft)

The main problem seems to be one of expressiveness not scaling up well, hence:

https://blueprintsfromhell.tumblr.com/

https://scriptsofanotherdimension.tumblr.com/

Presumably, one doesn't want to define modules/variables unnecessarily --- but the question becomes where is that boundary?

If you define too many, then you're back to the "wall of text" which one was trying to avoid (but wrapped up in nice boxes with some lines or shapes), and if one doesn't use them (well, look at the pretty/awful images in the links above).

Ideally, a well-coded visual program would have a pleasing aesthetic appearance which is expressive and communicates flow and function, and I've tried for that at:

https://willadams.gitbook.io/design-into-3d/programming

(though I wish that there was an easy way to export an SVG version of a program)

I believe that what is needed here is some graphical equivalent to Literate Programming: http://literateprogramming.com

Is there a nice GUI toolkit integration which would allow making a graphical application with this? I have an idea I want to try it which might be a good fit.

_That_ is a question I want an answer for.

Currently I am using OpenSCAD Graph Editor: https://github.com/derkork/openscad-graph-editor to create programs:

https://willadams.gitbook.io/design-into-3d/programming#open...

but the fundamental question which remains unanswered is:

>What does an algorithm look like?

Interesting.

I've long been frustrated by traditional CAD/CAM, so finally worked up:

https://github.com/WillAdams/gcodepreview

which allows me to use:

http://pythonscad.org/

and:

https://github.com/derkork/openscad-graph-editor

to create joinery:

https://forum.makerforums.info/t/openscad-and-python-looking...

which would otherwise be tedious to draw up:

https://community.carbide3d.com/t/creating-drawers/19475/26

Yes, unless you're a visually oriented person like myself who is trying to do the programming visually.

I use:

https://github.com/derkork/openscad-graph-editor

to try to design woodworking projects:

https://forum.makerforums.info/t/openscad-and-python-looking...

and I'd like to think that I'm managing to keep the visual appearance sufficiently expressive that it is easier to work with than a traditional textual code representation --- jury is still out on that, we'll see when I start re-purposing what I'm working on for odd/even sides, and then then doing the horizontal version of the joinery.

The problem here is that a fundamental question has not been answered, and as far as I can tell, has not been addressed by any of these visual environments:

What does an algorithm look like?

Herman Hesse alluded to this in his novel _The Glass Bead Game_, but despite decades of discussion and work, no one has made a convincing pysical representation of that system.

I love the concept, and have made some moderately complex attempts, e.g.,:

https://www.blockscad3d.com/community/projects/1430644

https://github.com/WillAdams/gcodepreview

it always devolves to screen size being out-paced by problem complexity --- one gets something of an inkling of this at:

https://scriptsofanotherdimension.tumblr.com/

Alternately, one can just break a project down into modules, but then the top-level view becomes the wall of text representation (albeit w/ nice lines or captured into pretty boxes) which one is ostensibly trying to escape.

I'd love to see someone succeed in this, and I've been using:

https://github.com/derkork/openscad-graph-editor

quite a bit, and put a bit of money towards:

http://nodezator.com/

I have been very pleased w/ and impressed by:

https://github.com/derkork/openscad-graph-editor

and really want to look deeper into it to see if it could be forked to create a version which creates Python code.

Yes.

OpenSCAD Graph Editor is done with an earlier version and runs on Mac OS, Windows, and Linux:

https://github.com/derkork/openscad-graph-editor

I'd really like to see someone get this right, but the problem is we don't seem to know the answer and are asking the wrong question:

>What does an algorithm look like?

Flowcharting and diagramming pre-date computers and used to be popular ways to define software workflows --- why hasn't that directly translated into coding?

The Drakon Editor folks short-circuit this with the idea that the desirable option is always straight down --- is that a viable solution?

The Node Editor folks have solutions which some folks use, but there are also sites filled with literal visual spaghetti code:

https://scriptsofanotherdimension.tumblr.com/

It's been the better part of a century since Herman Hesse wrote _The Glass Bead Game_, but the most flexible systems still end up as a wall of text, which can be hard to format, or which one limits to plain text --- all-too few programmers avail themselves of:

http://literateprogramming.com/

One promising development is Nintendo's _Game Builder's Garage_:

https://www.nintendo.com/store/products/game-builder-garage-...

(which when I gifted it to a co-worker's son was described as "This is the greatest game ever!")

These days I mostly do 3D, so have been using BlocksCAD:

https://www.blockscad3d.com/community/users/67750#/?_k=7br97...

and OpenSCAD Graph Editor:

https://github.com/derkork/openscad-graph-editor

I'd love to see a similar tool for making a GUI program.