Innovator

I very much doubt that. To clarify, though it will be arguable that the robot we create is living or not, a bipedal robot with AI sufficient to sufficient to drive it as well as interact with us in terms we can relate to as human-like is a certainty. We're already on that path.

...Until some disgruntled programmer programs in "Take a chance!" that is.

And I paraphrase...
Her death isn't a certainty but it's the way to bet; I think any attempt for Conan Doyle to have used her in a subsequent story (other than a reference to the past adventure) would be not very credible. Of course....he did just that with Holmes in The Adventure of the Empty House, who also was offed offscreen in The Final Problem.

It's important to me, I actually want my computer to be sentient enough to be able to help me with stuff, or even converse with to work stuff out with. There aren't many people around with my goals and skillsets, and I'm the guy people usually go to help them with their stuff, so I always end up having to work alone...and talking to trees (they're not good conversationalists either, but at least they listen).

Well to be fair in the story that featured her, A Scandal in Bohemia, she was offed off-screen on the first paragraph even though she ultimately left an impression on the fans.

That looks way cool. I find it funny one of the people quoted that they should be spending resources to cure cancer than the these robots. Pft, its like he doesn't realize that cancer will be cured once these robots replace humans.

...of electronic sheep.

Yeah, I probably shouldn't have done this from scratch. But I had a problem with lack of resources and equipment for a full 3D project so I decided the best way to complete the project was 2D objects on a 3D plane. Doing it from scratch seemed best as I can control the graphics scaling better for best quality since the objects are basically 2D sprites. Also, for now, the window itself only needs to pan up, down, left, and right, therefore this seemed the way to go.

The next 3D project I do for sure I'll do with 3D graphics APIs.

True that. I try to keep things as simple as possible (and with lots of remarks) so I can at least figure out later what I did should I need to add features or have to debug something about it.

I always do when I code, I was just going along with Durakken in the post.

Actually, my variables go even further by designing its type. So for instance x, y, z would be fX, fY, fZ the "f" stating that the variables are floating point variables.

That's right, it is mentioned in A Scandal in Bohemia that Irene Adler dies at some unchronicled point.*

Here's an interesting comics tidbit: In Marvel Comics, Irene Adler goes on to become the blind supervillain Destiny. It is also strongly hinted that Sherlock Holmes was actually Mystique.

*Not really a spoiler since its on the first paragraph of the story in which Irene Adler first appears.

Here you go, from Wikipedia:
Holmes is described as a formidable bare-knuckle fighter. In The Sign of the Four, Holmes introduces himself to a prize-fighter as:

"The amateur who fought three rounds with you at Alison's rooms on the night of your benefit four years back".

McMurdo responds by saying, "Ah, you're one that has wasted your gifts, you have! You might have aimed high, if you had joined the fancy".

Holmes engages in hand-to-hand combat with his adversaries on occasions throughout the stories, inevitably emerging the victor. It is mentioned also in "Gloria Scott" that Holmes trained as a boxer, and in "The Yellow Face" Watson comments that "he was undoubtedly one of the finest boxers of his weight that I have ever seen."

The only major point the movies deviate from the stories concerns Watson's wife Mary Morstan. Mary Morstan in the stories was a client of Holmes in The Sign of Four when she meets Watson. In the first movie, Mary is introduced to Holmes by Watson after they are already engaged.

Because the rise of the variable was set for the window already in b=500.0. What the formula is trying to do is either turn b into 0 or get the difference if the window is panned up or down hence b-500. y=640 put into the code is fine though.

As far as the multiply is concerened, c++ needs the * symbol to designate mulitiplication, the compiler would read d2 as a variable in itself instead of d*2.

v = 500;
y = 640;
z = (v(y-b)/(a+(b-500)-b))-v;
x = (c-d2)*((z+v)/v)+d;

or in c++ code:
v=500.0f;
y=640.0f;
z=(v*(y-b)/(a+(b-500.0f)-b))-v;
x=(c-d*2)*((z+v)/v)+d;

Oh yeah that one. I guess I didn't find that as irritating as the other over uses of masks in the other previous movies.

I suppose I could change it to look like this to make my intent clearer, but it doesn't really make a difference.

z = touch.y + (window.y - 500); z = ((500 * (640.0 - window.y)) / (z - window.y)) - 500;
x = touch.x - window.x; x = ((x - window.x) * ((z + 500) / 500)) + window.x;
y = 640.0;

I put the touch values modified by the viewpoint of the window to get the correct x,y values at a z of 0.0 (the screen/window as understood by the renderer and which is not always the same a the mouse/touch pointer value as the viewpoint can change). I then used that value into pretty much the same formula used to render the world modified to solve for z instead of x or y (in this case using y to solve for z).

The second part after the ";" of the second line calculates for x based on the location of the touch at z of 0 (first part) and then the value derived for z, since I'm shooting at a location ahead x has to be modified by the z value to get a correct target.

After using the y touch location to solve for z, I didnt need to use the value for anything else so I put the y value back to its constant 640.0 plane (the ground where the puck slides) on the third line.

These lines are basically to set the ending location of a projectile sliding forward along the ground that's straight. The values that may change other than touch is the view point of the window/screen which can pan the world left right up an down, therefore modifies the targeting.

It's all good. Tenjoy got your back and helped me solve the issue. Thanks anyway!

Nothing if it wasn't so overused in the Mission Impossible movies (especially the second one). It became the basis for all their missions. I don't remember a mask being used in this new one, I know they were gonna use them but the mask making machine couldn't finish in time. I was happy to see them do a mission without them.

Yep, pretty much this.

Hmmm something is backwards here...with this the puck seems to end up higher on the screen the lower I point on the screen.
Edit: I saw where you were going with this so I did some recalculating myself, and got the same solution as you. However, when I tried the solution, the z ended up with higher numbers than expected causing the puck to appear to go higher the lower I touch. Ugg...back to the mind grinder.

Yes exactly what I'm asking! I'll get back to you on this after some tests. Thanks for clearing it up, as I said my brain has been through the grinder on this.