It’s definitely satire. 2 million lines of code is an absurd under-exageration. This post had me looking up the number of possible chess games, because if you coded chess like above you would have to have an if statement for every outcome, and it’s 10^120 different possible games.
That’s the number of possible games, the number of possible board states is much lower, 10^40.
Although you’re still clearly correct in the end anyways because it’s still an absurd number of board states and it’s not even formatted to be one state per line.
This game was developed by someone who didn’t know anything about programming outside of IF statements, integers, and strings. Here is an excerpt of the massively long source code
There’s a mathematician that figured that there’s 10^120 possible chess games, as a lower bound. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_number#:~:text=Shannon showed a calculation for,a Computer for Playing Chess".
That’s a 1 followed by 120 zeros for just the number of possible games. With this method they’d have to manually go through every move for every one of those games. If we say a game lasts 30 turns on average and they’d take 1 second to code each turn (realistically it’d be longer) it’d take 6.9*10^109 (69 followed by 108 zeros) times as long as the age of the universe.
The post is satire, but I remember being ~8-9 and trying to create a “game” in Microsoft Word with hyperlinks between documents and nothing else. I had hundreds of documents (each representing a game state) before I got tired of that project.
I really hope this is satire. Otherwise I’m scared to ask how long it took.
It’s definitely satire. 2 million lines of code is an absurd under-exageration. This post had me looking up the number of possible chess games, because if you coded chess like above you would have to have an if statement for every outcome, and it’s 10^120 different possible games.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_number
The way I understood it, it’s two million lines and nowhere near finished.
Anyway, satire.
You only have to code a fraction of those as the computer should take the same move for several of the user inputs.
That’s the number of possible games, the number of possible board states is much lower, 10^40.
Although you’re still clearly correct in the end anyways because it’s still an absurd number of board states and it’s not even formatted to be one state per line.
Today I will remind everyone of DRAGON: A Game About a Dragon
This game was developed by someone who didn’t know anything about programming outside of IF statements, integers, and strings. Here is an excerpt of the massively long source code
For a second there I thought the 100% science-based dragons game had been made.
My eyes! The
globalvariable list is huge!Edit: nm, I looked again and they’re in a class. Still insane either way.
Literally impossible to code every bosrd state, so forever
There’s a mathematician that figured that there’s 10^120 possible chess games, as a lower bound. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_number#:~:text=Shannon showed a calculation for,a Computer for Playing Chess". That’s a 1 followed by 120 zeros for just the number of possible games. With this method they’d have to manually go through every move for every one of those games. If we say a game lasts 30 turns on average and they’d take 1 second to code each turn (realistically it’d be longer) it’d take 6.9*10^109 (69 followed by 108 zeros) times as long as the age of the universe.
So it’s doable? That’s all I needed to hear.
The post is satire, but I remember being ~8-9 and trying to create a “game” in Microsoft Word with hyperlinks between documents and nothing else. I had hundreds of documents (each representing a game state) before I got tired of that project.