I don't understand this. I always thought 64K demos are actually 64kB in size, where is this "technically 256 (of what)" larger than the OP demo?
Seriously curious.
I don't understand this. I always thought 64K demos are actually 64kB in size, where is this "technically 256 (of what)" larger than the OP demo?
Those demos are 64 kilobytes in filesize while the demo in the OP is just 256 bytes in size. Thats 256 times smaller.I don't understand this. I always thought 64K demos are actually 64kB in size, where is this "technically 256 (of what)" larger than the OP demo?
Seriously curious.
Sure you can - a single routine from that intro should be way smaller than the whole package.Its worth pointing out the difference in filesize because while the 64kb demos tend to look and sound stunning - the amazing thing about the 256 bytes demo is the fact that its actually running while beeing incredibly tiny in size. I doubt that you can go smaller than that.
Music in demos these days is done with integrated synthesizers (used to be tracker modules with very basic waveforms or just MIDI IIRC). For example Tunefish, by Brain Control
Tunefish is a very tiny virtual analog synthesizer. It is developed to fit into about 10kb of compressed machine code while still producing an audio quality that can compete with commercial synthesizers. This site was created to make the VST/AU version of it available to the public. This plugin, unlike the version of TF which is used in 64k intros of our group Brain Control is of course larger, mainly because it has a UI and uses the excellent Juce framework for C++.
Ahhh, yes indeed, that makes it clearer.Those demos are 64 kilobytes in filesize while the demo in the OP is just 256 bytes in size. Thats 256 times smaller.
I think that was pretty rare, no? Most 486 had 8MB.
There is 16/32/64/128 bytes scene. :)
This is what I really hate these days. Devs simply throw around with gigabxtes instead of compressing them in a orderly manner.
Ask the n64 devs how they got their games on the cartridges. And the biggest mystery of all time= how the flying fuck was capcom able to pull resident evil 2 on a n64-cart?
2discs each 650mb...
You are correct, i had 8 MB not 4.I think that was pretty rare, no? Most 486 had 8MB.
I remember games coming out that required 8MB, but my parents had a 386 with 4MB. That sucked! You could still run the executable and the game most of the time, but it would just crash after a short while.
Also the same machine had a 'Turbo' button on the case that allowed me to beat MK2, by disabling it and cutting the processor speed in half (making Kintaro go slow-motion, haha)
Music in demos these days is done with integrated synthesizers (used to be tracker modules with very basic waveforms or just MIDI IIRC). For example Tunefish, by Brain Control
Home
www.tunefish-synth.com
or V2 by Farbrausch
V2 by farbrausch - Synth (Analogue / Subtractive) Plugin VST
Features: 3 oscillators with sync - Osc1 (Saw/Tri, Pulse, Sin, Noise), Osc2&3: Tri, Pulse, Sine, Noise, FM, Ring Modulation. 2 filters -...www.kvraudio.com
For those who were into demos, in case you missed it, the holly grail was released some times back, the source code for Second Reality by Future Crew
GitHub - mtuomi/SecondReality: Source code and data of Second Reality by Future Crew in 1993
Source code and data of Second Reality by Future Crew in 1993 - mtuomi/SecondRealitygithub.com
What the everloving hell. Holy fucking shit, I cannot express enough how insanely impressive this. 256 bytes. Not even a damn kilobyte.
Check this out:
This program, that simply calls main and exits and does nothing else, is 36 times bigger than this demo.
I legitimately think it's a miracle that 4K demos get made. It's hard as hell to get a demo down to 4k. 256 bytes is another level. A couple of years ago, I wrote a PC Booter application from scratch, a micro kernel to teach myself how to boot my own code from the boot strap. My loader alone was like 10 KB.
Unbelievable.
Some would say I'm biased, as it's the first microprocessor language I learned and most people tend to be extremely in love with their first language, but I legitimately think the 68000 is the greatest microprocessor created for people learning microprocessor assembly. Its instruction set is very, very easy to pick up, it's super relaxed about conversion rules (depending on assembler), there are mountains of resources for learning it, and most importantly: It's got fat registers, lots of them. Eight 32-bit data registers and seven 32-bit address registers. The more work you do with microprocessors, the more you realize having a lot of really thick registers is a godsend, as those are essentially your "hardware variables" as I like to call them.
The 6502 is basically the opposite concept. It's extremely basic, giving you only a couple of registers essentially. The idea is after each operation, you'll want to move your data out of the register back into memory. The 6502 is built on every operation being extremely simple, at the expense of performance. The 68000 is the opposite, you have so many registers that you can just leave data in them and do all the work you need. So like, if you need to update multiple variables, instead of having to put them into registers on the 6502, do your operation, then take them out, then load the next data, put it into the register, do your operation, then take it back out, etc, on the 68000 you can just load up all the data you want at once and do all your calculations. You have so many registers, each of which can be thought of as one 32-bit register, or two 16-bit registers, or four 8-bit registers... just so useful.
I think 68000 assembler is probably one of the most vital things someone serious about software engineering can pick up. It'll teach you things about other microprocessors in the process. When I work with modern GPUs, I use lots of things I learned way back when I was picking up 68000 assembly.
You mean the binary? The compiled binary is 256 bytes. The assembly code, even with comments removed, is larger than that.How about this frame of reference for people to get how small this is: the maximum length of a single tweet is 280 characters, so you could fit the assembly code of the entire demo in a single Tweet.
(in fact, depending on what encoding Twitter uses, you may be able to fit it twice).
And in case you don't know about this, here's Fabien Sanglard's excellent and detailed analysis of the source code: http://fabiensanglard.net/second_reality/index.php
I recommend his whole site.
You mean the binary? The compiled binary is 256 bytes. The assembly code, even with comments removed, is larger than that.
I actually have no idea if it was rare or not, i never checked into that, but our 486 DX2 66MHz came with 4MB of RAM. That was back in 1994. Many games at that time did run fine with 4MB of RAM.I think that was pretty rare, no? Most 486 had 8MB.
I remember games coming out that required 8MB, but my parents had a 386 with 4MB. That sucked! You could still run the executable and the game most of the time, but it would just crash after a short while.
Also the same machine had a 'Turbo' button on the case that allowed me to beat MK2, by disabling it and cutting the processor speed in half (making Kintaro go slow-motion, haha)
That is pretty amazing for sure!
I actually have no idea if it was rare or not, i never checked into that, but our 486 DX2 66MHz came with 4MB of RAM. That was back in 1994. Many games at that time did run fine with 4MB of RAM.
Hehe, i also remember when games started to require 8MB of RAM. I specifically remember wanting to play Destruction Derby from a demo CD that i had. I (or my family rather) got 8MB RAM extra one christmas. I think it was like $220 or something, and that was more money back then than what it is now. Totally worth it though hehe =)
Good times :) I went from the 486 DX2 66MHz to a 200MMX.Yeah 4MB was common even for a DX2 in 1993, so that's what you inherited in 94 :) ... but damn Strike Commander recommended 8MB... i skipped the 486, jumping from the 386 to the pentium 75 (what a jump) but i suffered until i got it.
Funny, i made a lot of demos on my old 386 that were going slow (specially 3D) ... but with the side effect they ran "butter-smooth" on the 486.
By the way, question to those who coded back in the days...
I was a Turbo Assembler devout, anyone else preferred it to MASM ?