Madelaine McMasters

Hippie Bowman wrote: No turkey is safe here in the US! Yep, and my arm is getting tired from holding my bow in the cocked position since halloween. My purple turkey over there on the left is about to get it, for commiting "A"dultery. Hi, Kids!!!

JoyofRLC Acker wrote: I recall seeing somewhere to beware of GPU benchmarks based on other games, something to do with DirectX. I guess my question really is, nonetheless are they a good guide as the RELATIVE power, for SL, of different GPU? Also, are the Intel Iris GPUS in Mac notebooks as bad as other chips? I'm toying with the idea of going Mac for other reasons, but am nervous about using a MacBook (other than a fully loaded Pro which I likely can't afford ). The only comprehensive GPU benchmark listings use the PassMark test, which is based on DirectX and runs on Windows. The PassMark tests for Android and iOS use OpenGL. SecondLife runs on OpenGL, regardless of underlying OS. So, we are forced to use benchmarks that are not representative of our needs. The benchmarks are potentially doubly indirect for Mac users, as differences in OpenGL implementations on Win/Mac OS would not be revealed in DirectX/Win benchmarks. But you must make the best of what you have, and that's the benchmark tables here... http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_list.php

Hi Tamara, As Perrie and Freya said, the teleporter you described is Pandora Wrigglesworth's "Anywhere Door"... There's a ladder in my lighthouse that might work for you. I'll ask the creator if it's for sale.

Hmm, I just copied the script from my post and pasted it into a new script in a prim and it works fine, generating "Could not find sound" errors for the two missing sounds when touched, as it should until appropriately named sound files are added to the contents folder. Check your cut/paste?

I thought the logic of that script was rather opaque. In my world (small microcontrollers), you'd not code a binary state in a float, as you usually don't have floating point hardware. You'd also avoid multiplies, as you often don't even have hardware multiply. So I'd have coded the on/off state in an integer (or a bit field, if the underlying processor had bit test instructions and RAM was tight) named "Open" and passed constants to the timer, depending on the state of "Open". But Void is Void. ;-)

//-- 90 degrees around z axis, use - 90 to reverse directionvector vDegSwing = <0, 0, -90>;rotation vRotSwing;//-- 10.0 seconds till auto closefloat vFltTmt = 5.0;float vFltOpn;float Volume = 1;uDoor(){ llSetLocalRot( (vRotSwing = ZERO_ROTATION / vRotSwing) * llGetLocalRot() ); llSetTimerEvent( (vFltOpn = (float)(!((integer)vFltOpn)) * vFltTmt) ); // vFltOpn will flip between zero and vFltTmt if(vFltOpn){ llPlaySound("DoorOpen",Volume); } else { llPlaySound("DoorClose",Volume); }}default{ state_entry(){ vRotSwing = llEuler2Rot( vDegSwing * DEG_TO_RAD ); // convert to rotation } touch_start( integer vIntNull ){ uDoor(); } timer(){ if (vFltOpn){ uDoor(); } }} You will need two sounds, called "DoorOpen" and "DoorClose" in the contents folder of the prim (door) where the script resides. Volume controls the loudness of the played sounds, 1 = max, 0 = off. It appears your door will open/close very quickly, as it makes only one call to llSetLocalRot() to do the entire 90 degree rotation. Your door sounds will have to be very short.

Hi Clyde, While I've never experienced hand trembling, I have had worn attachments (shoes in my case) interfere with hand poses. Try detaching things one at a time to see if the hand tremble goes away. The last thing removed will be the likely culprit and it will contain scripts of some kind. The scripts are the cause of the hand pose interference, though I don't know how. Good luck!

Hippie Bowman wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: Good morning, Hippie! Baby, it's cold (9F!) outside!... Brrrrrr Maddy! It was about 58F here in Florida this morning. I love it here in the winter months! Woot! Peace! I love it here in winter as well. Snow is magical, and the realization that winter weather is deadly turns my home into my safe and cozy fortress against the elements, not just a box in which to keep my stuff.

steph Arnott wrote: "Tests in January 2013 show that user functions in Mono no longer (if ever) automatically take up a block of memory (512 bytes) each. As with all Mono code, an extra 512-block of memory is used when needed, but not automatically per user function. In addition the perceived memory usage can vary depending, it is thought, on the action of periodic garbage collection. Inserting an llSleep() for instance, maybe allowing garbage collection to jump in, before reading memory usage, can show a reduction in space used." If that's the case, then the advantage of using functions will come after fewer uses of the code, so long as the function is larger than the calling overhead. Again, we don't know how big a function is, nor how big the calling overhead is, so we can't be certain whether turning something into a function makes sense. I was not aware of the 512 byte code block size until reading Sassy's description. In my professional life, I have tools that tell me exactly what the cost of everything is, both in terms of memory usage and execution time, so it's always possible and often easy to determine whether to code something inline or as a function. Absent such tools, I'd code for ease of understanding, and that would often mean turning something into a function the moment doing so makes my program easier to figure out. And that may mean (horror of horrors) turning something into a function that gets called only once, but is used so often in my programming that it's nice to have it all wrapped up with a pretty bow. And this practice is commonplace in the programming world, resulting in collections of functions called "libraries". Depending on the sophistication of the programming environment, including a library in your project may include all the functions therein, even if you don't call them, or may bring in only those functions you do call. As always, good programming is a balancing act between the constraints of the systems the programs run on, and the constraints of the organizations that hire the programmers and purchase the programming tools to get the job done.

Good morning, Hippie! Baby, it's cold (9F!) outside!...

Hi Steph, Imagine you have a Sassy's function to add two numbers... add(n1,n2): float add(float n1, float n2){ return(n1+n2); } And you'd call it with: n3=add(n1,n2); As Sassy said, our trivial "add" function will compile on a new 512 byte boundary, so the smallest it can be is 512 bytes. But, if you coded this "add" inline, it would look like: n3=n1+n2; And probably compile into just one byte. In addition to the 512 byte minimum size of a function, the compiler must generate byte-codes in your program to put the function's arguments on the stack, put the return address (the location of the statement after the function call) there too, and finally retrieve the result from the stack. That overhead will be at least a few bytes of byte-code, so it's quite possible that the byte-code cost for making a function call (even ignoring the space taken by the function itself) can be greater than the inline cost of a trivial function. In a trivial case such as this, turning "add" into a function would make no sense at all. You waste 512 bytes by creating the function and another few bytes each time you call it. But there is a point at which it makes sense to turn something into a function. I can't tell you exactly where that point is, it depends on the amount of byte-code in the function, the function call overhead (which will depend on the number and kind of arguments passed to it and returned from it) and how many times you call it, and we really have no easy way of measuring a function's size, nor the overhead of calling one. But let's say we did, and we discover this for another pretend function called foo()... Function call overhead = 4 bytes. Size of foo's code when compiled inline = 191 bytes So, we know that turning foo() into a function will increase its size from 191 to 512 bytes, and that every time we call it, we'll consume another 4 bytes of script memory. It then becomes possible to determine at what point it's worth turning foo into a function. First, there's no reason to turn anything into a function if you're only going to call it once, so we'll start by looking at two calls. Inline cost 2 x 191 bytes = 382 bytes Function cost 2 x call overhead (4 bytes) = 8 1 x foo as a function = 512 bytes Total = 520 bytes Function cost (520) > Inline Cost (382) So it makes no sense to turn foo into a function if you'll call it only twice. Now let's look at calling foo three times... Inline cost 2 x 191 bytes = 573 bytes Function cost 3 x call overhead (4 bytes) = 12 1 x foo as a function = 512 bytes Total = 524 bytes Function cost (524) < Inline cost (573) Now, it does make sense turn foo into a function. Calling a function takes longer than executing it inline, though in the case of LSL, that overhead may be negligible, particularly if the function does things that take a lot of time. As Sassy stated, calling a function also takes some stack space, as the script must pass the numbers to the function, remember where to return after calling the function (the statement after the call), and return the result. All of that (for simple functions) is done on the stack. Heap usage is probably the same whether you inline or use a function.

こんにちは mamekomochi、 あなたが質問をしているかどうかは知りません。 Android用の非常に基本的なSecond Lifeのビューアがあります。あなたがそれをここに見つけることができます... http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Third_Party_Viewer_Directory Androidの視聴者はセカンドライフを使用するための最適ではない。モバイル機器はまだセカンドライフのようなハイレベルな3D環境の要件を処理するのに十分な処理能力を持っていません。 モバイル視聴者にとって十分な需要がある場合には、おそらく、リンデンラボは、1を開発します。 あなたがセカンドライフを使用するには、プレミアムメンバーシップを購入する必要はありません。無料の衣類やその他の項目は、世界的にとSecond Lifeの市場で利用可能です... https://marketplace.secondlife.com Question: Or 's because you are using Android, you can not use at all. You can not be made without also go to the house, if I buy a house with a premium registration, to see even avatar. Answer: Hello, I do not know if you are asking a question. There is a very basic Second Life viewer for Android. You can find it here... Android viewers are not optimal for using Second Life. Mobile devices do not yet have enough processing power to handle the requirements of high level 3D environments like Second Life. If there is sufficient demand for a mobile viewer, perhaps Linden Labs will develop one. It is not necessary to purchase a premium membership. Free clothing and other items are available in-world and in the marketplace...

Hi Gianna, SL doesn't give you objects. Some other resident gave you an object, which you then apparently wore. To rid yourself of it and its effects, open your inventory window and select the "Worn" panel and carefully look at all the things you are wearing. If you see something that's not an item of clothing familar to you, right click on it and select "Take Off". If your avatar returns to moving normally, right click on the thing again and select "Delete". If that doesn't work, come back to edit your question via "Options" over there on the right and we'll think of something else. Good luck, and don't take candy from strangers!

It's been more than 26 years since that day, and I still shiver when I think of the potential for mayo to have actually touched me. Proximal Mayonnaise Syndrome is no laughing matter. Pity me.

Well, I'll have to hear about it from you and others. I haven't got a TV and can't find a way to watch it online. :-(

Hi Healer, Until very recently, I thought SL used only one CPU core. Although I do not see it using more than one cpu's worth of processing power on my iMac, I've been told that, since V2, SL Viewers can use more than one core. Here's a quote from Monty Linden last week, in response to my mistaken claim that SL still runs on only one core... "As a data point... a windows viewer performing texture and mesh downloads can keep 1.75-2.5 cores busy averaged over many seconds. Burst demand can be higher. Steady state after all assets are resident on the host will be lower. " Now, it may be that the additional cores are only used during texture and mesh downloads, I don't know. But it seems there should be times when you see SL crawl over to additional cores to get the job done.

Hi Lilly, As Knowl said, your inventory has not been lost, it's still on the SL servers. It's only your local copy of the inventory list that's been corrupted, and it will have to be reloaded. If you have problems like this often, it could be that your connection to SL is fragile. If you are on wi-fi, you might try a direct cable connection to your router. This will minimize the potential for future corruption of local files on your computer due to glitches in the connection. If trying Knowl's suggestion doesn't bring back your inventory list, come back and edit your question via "Options" over there on the right and let us know, and we'll see what else we can recommend to help. Good luck!

Hi MeiLaie, It's not our game. We're residents just like you. There are endless freebies, public sandboxs in which you can build things (though not for permanent placement) and many interesting places to visit. There are lots of nice people here that require only that you make some effort to meet them. That effort can seem formidible for the timid, but this is a grand place to work though that. I didn't spend a penny for my first six months in Second Life. If I'd wanted to, I could have gone another five years without spending a penny. There are compromises you make if you don't want to spend money, and I understand if you're not willing to make them, but the cost of participating here is largely up to you.

Sephina Frostbite wrote: Giggles thanks for my morning laugh. It's not funny, Sephina! He liked mayo. I hate mayo. Can you imagine if he'd got mayo on me! At least I was kind enough to drop jelly donuts on him.

Steph, Rolig was suggesting that people learn better by actually trying things, rather than being shown the way. And that's why she was holding back and not showing the OP how to do it. The famous American humorist Will Rogers made the wry observation that some people may learn only by doing, and that you probably can't show or tell them anything. That was not what Rolig was suggesting, though I think we've all met people who are a little like that, or we have been someone who is a little like that. You wouldn't have to search very hard to find someone who thinks that trying to teach me is pointless. ;-)

Perrie Juran wrote: Maybe by your terms I should have taken Prok referring to us as 'kids' a complement. "Hi, Kids!!!", was Mom's usual greeting to Dad and me. She told everybody she had two children. As I've said before... As for adults behaving like children, there are times and ways in which that is a lovely thing to do. To paraphrase Mark Twain, the difference between childish and childlike behavior is like the difference between lightning and a lightning bug. I won't tell you how to take Prok's referring to us as kids, but I assure you that when I say it, I intend it as a compliment. ;-)

Sephina Frostbite wrote: Have you ever dreamed about walking down the run way. I've done that, while my flight instructor tried to drop his sack lunch on me from 100 feet above!

Rolig Loon wrote: Yes, of course, but I was letting the OP discover that and a number of other things for herself. She'll probably learn better that way. She's doing OK so far. :smileywink: Will Rogers said, "There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves." What Will Rogers neglected to mention is that peeing on the electric fence is still the fastest way for readers and observers to learn. And that, with a suitable substitution (in my case it was touching an electric fence with a buttered piece of bread), this applies to women as well. ;-)

Perrie Juran wrote: You accused us of being "kids." Prove to us that you are an adult by acting like one here." Perrie, Prok is acting like an adult. People who believe the Earth is flat are acting like adults. People who won't vaccinate their children, even with vaccines containing no thimersol (mercury) are acting like adults. Scientologists are acting like adults when they probe each other with their E-Meters. People who believe JFK was assassinated by aliens are acting like adults. I believe adult behavior is highly overrated. If Prok were behaving (a better word than "acting") like a child, there would be a substantial likelihood of changes in position on various subjects as understanding is gained. Kids do that all the time. Do you see evidence that Prok is gaining understanding? Every one of us rejects evidence that challenges our belief systems. The trick is to recognize when we're doing it, and to try to open ourselves up to the challenge. In this regard, children should be our role models. ;-)

valerie Inshan wrote: LOL! I was wearing shoes. Does that count? Good morning Maddy!!! Shoes definitely count! Wear two, no more, no less!