!rant , a question (on the end, after explanation) :

this is a result of (according to my time tracking) 10 hours and 50 minutes of coding.

captures mouse cursor into list of points, uses those to triangulate a flat polygon (manually doing all the mesh math of ordering them correctly, earclip triangulating, and indices generating), as well as to create inner and outer outline (no official algorithm, my own which I came up with on the spot) of a certain thickness.
(the outline drawing is just for debug yet, now I'm going to extrude them upwards to form walls)

soooo... I've been always curious about how effective/fast/efficient of a programmer I am, but it's usually hard to measure/compare, so I thought I'd try this way: how long do you think implementing something like this would take YOU?

thanks :)

  • 0
    @andros705 yeah, i know I shouldn't compare myself to others in this way, but... I don't really do it as a performance metric, it's just out of curiosity. i know where and how good my skills are, roughly, and I'm actually (most of the time) pretty happy about their level and distribution.

    ...could use more discipline, though =D
  • 0
    @andros705 i just realized... it's actually the other way around. i don't compare myself to others, i compare others to me.

    if they are better (in whatever way relevant at the moment) i respect them. if they are roughly equal to me, i like them. if they are worse than me, they bore (up to frustrate) me and i usually don't see a reason or have the need to interact with them.

    ... that's kinda cruel and talks kinda badly about my personality, i guess...

    but it also really serves as a good indicator of how compatible i am/we are (going to be) in interactions
  • 0
    @Midnigh-shcode That is indeed kind of cruel and yes speaks badly about your personality. You've really bought into the whole cult of exceptionalism eh?
  • 1
    I think a better way of measuring your performance is by estimating how long you think something will take you, and then checking back after you are done to see how close to the mark you were. It's not giving you the metric you are trying to find here, but it is a far more useful measure I think in the long run.
  • 0
    @catadoxa nah, i USED to think i'm exceptional, but later i realized it was just an illusion caused by environment where most people were exceptionally dumb.

    then relatively recently i even got to terms with knowing i'm not exceptional. but that only kinda reinforces the approach i have, because if someone is worse (by metrics relevant within context) that means he actually is crappy, because i'm just... average.

    and if someone is better than me, that means they are at least nearing the land of above average, thus deserving of my respect.

    still amuses me how the logic works out the same even though my (self-percieved) position on the scale changed pretty substantially =D
Add Comment