[stnmtn]

This one made me laugh, mostly because the variable names are so dumb

// our RNG is basically shit -- horribly nonrandom at the start of the sequence.

// get a few values at random to get rid of the dreck.

// there's no mathematical basis for this, but empirically, it helps a lot.

UnsignedInt silly = GetGameLogicRandomSeed() % 7;

for (Int poo = 0; poo < silly; ++poo)

{

GameLogicRandomValue(0, 1); // ignore result

}

[anal_reactor]

I spent some time browing curiosities about old games, and what strikes me is that the code sometimes was quite personal. You could see the joy, the anger, the disappointment, the satisfaction. Nowadays it would never fly to name a variable "poo", you need to stay professional at all times.

[qingcharles]

I was a game dev in the mid 90s. It was unserious. There was all sorts of crazy shit in the graphics assets. One wall I remember says "CUNT" on it o_O

I'm sad if developers can no longer name their variables poo and fuck.

Also teenage me would probably be horrified finding out 30 years later his source code was public.

[mschuster91]

> Nowadays it would never fly to name a variable "poo", you need to stay professional at all times.

I couldn't help but chuckle at your user name when reading this comment

[hasley]

Still today, I tend to increase my motivation of writing unit tests by using some non-serious names and strings in the tests.

[recursive]

Probably depends how indie/small your studio is.

[herewulf]

Nowadays it just depends on how shitty your job is.

[lofaszvanitt]

says who?

[yobbo]

This is similar to "burn-in" for markov-chain montecarlo. When the chain is initialized to some bad value, it requires a number of iterations to get into a "good chain". But for a uniform RNG, any value should be good.

So the RNG doesn't seem great.

[account42]

Well it works for RC4