This is probably old news to this group but I came across it today and thought it might be of passing interest
"Welcome to the world of railway signalling! SimSig brings the signalbox to your home PC, and with it the enjoyment and frustrations of a running today's railways.
SimSig is free and, as such, is not regularly maintained. However, updates do happen from time to time and we may bring out a new simulation every now and again, so keep visiting the site!"
On Fri, 9 Jan 2009 23:16:43 -0000, "Mike Smith" said in :
Toooooo haaaaaard!
Back to lever frames with no more than a dozen points, for me :-)
Guy
Used to be paid for years ago which is why some need a license key. Liverpool street can get quite tricky especially for the scenario with two of the approach lines closed.
Chris
There is also a very good (paid for) product that simulates quite a number of actual boxes and timetables. Have a look at
Nowhere on this site I can find a reference to computer system requirements. Exept "PC". I'm running Linux on Intel pentium.
I prefer to leave that job to computing hobbyists. If Simsig is written in C++ porting should be not too hard. If written in VisualBasic or some other Microsoft speciality it is too much for one man in what is left of one lifetime...
If it's not too excessively complex, and is programmed in good old GDI/GDI+ then it would run on Wine fairly straightforwardly I would suspect. Have't got time or inclination to try it though.
Agreed though if it's written in C/C++ then porting should be a doddle. Is the code available? I might have a stab.
Rob.
It is a Windows program should run OK on Windows VM on your Linux box, works OK on my Mac that way.
Chris
Thanks!
Wow am amazed by your confidence and ability. Some of the (loosely termed) C++ I've had to look at isnt a doddle - esp the 7000 line functions with comments along the lines of i++; // increment i x = 0; //set x to zero
Cheers, Simon
Seems like some beginner's code, who needs to remember that i++ stands for "use i, and then increment i". Standard C. Don't think any compiler stumbles about such elementary things...
Very meaningful variable names, I was once told that careful selection of names for variables, functions etc negates the need for comments as it is apparent from the code what it does. Although commercial code is sometimes obscured to make it less easy to reverse engineer.
Chris
There's a competition for the most obfuscated code (IOCCC). The winner in 1998 was a flight simulator in under 2 kilobytes of code, complete with relatively accurate 6-degree-of-freedom dynamics, loadable wireframe scenery, and a small instrument panel!
Nevertheless, elementary constructs as i++; x=0; do not normally have to be explained by comments. Except perhaps for beginner's lesson 1.
it was meant as a demonstration of a useless comment thats adds nothing to understanding that isnt immediately obvious from the code itself. People do things like that to claim its fully documented. Cheers, Simon
Comments in-line should explain *why* something is being done rather than
*what* is being done - there should also be comments at a higher-level ahead of each major code element, e.g. procedure, function or logical block, giving a short summary of the overall intention of that block and ideally containing a reference back to the part of the requirements specification to which the code relates. I know, completely idealistic and not practised in the real world .... perhaps that explains why we are so acceptaing of crap software!
Agree.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required