operating systems – CPU scheduling Decisions

Operating System – CPU scheduling Decisions

The question above talks about why CPU scheduling does not take place when ready to running.

But I wander why CPU scheduling does not take place when new to ready. I think it is similar to the process of waiting to ready. They both add processes to ready without changing processes that are running.

enter image description here

architecture – Utility AI system making decisions on targeting and more

So I am making my own Utility AI system based on the Dave Mark Infinite Axis Utility System:

However, some questions during my development come up:

First, let me introduce you to my basic structure:


All actions have a list of potential considerations

    public abstract class BaseAction : ScriptableObject {
    public List<BaseConsideration> InputAxises;
    public EnumActionState ActionState;
    public abstract void Act(BaseAiContext ctx);
    public abstract float GetScore(BaseAiContext ctx);
    public abstract void Update(BaseAiContext cts);
    public abstract bool IsDone(BaseAiContext ctx);

Then it has a state that tells me when an action is done.

Then I have a simple AIContext that has a list of potential actions my Agent can take. it then scores all actions and then selects the highest scored


    public abstract class BaseConsideration : ScriptableObject, IConsideration
    public EnumEvaluator EvaluatorType;
    public string NameId { get; }
    public float Weight { get; set; }
    public bool IsInverted { get; set; }
    public string DataKey { get; set; }

    public float Xa;
    public float Xb;
    public float Ya;
    public float Yb;
    public float K;
    public abstract float Consider(BaseAiContext context);
    public abstract float Consider(float x);


ofc the consider function uses an evaluator (Linear, sigmoid etc) to find the best match.

Now, this is where things begin to get a little bit fuzzy for me.

let’s say that I have a melee guy who has an action “Attack Enemy” then I have a sensor that tells the Context which targets he has available then I make the following structure:

(Action) Melee Attack

  • (Decision) is there a target within melee distance

Then back in my action, I choose the closest target. and attack it

Is this how it is supposed to be? or should considerations be able to select targets for the AI context? Have I done something wrong in my architecture or?

Update boiled down

I think the main problem i have is what defines an action and how deep do they go?

Here are two examples of an actions:

  • Select a target
  • Melee Attack

The first (Select a target) would be to select from a list and then complete

While the second might do the following steps:

  1. Select a target
  2. Go to target if far away
  3. Attack with a sword

Also, what is the job of the consideration should the consideration be able to set values of the AI Context or should it only return a score based on the Graph model?

Where can I find architecture/design decisions for open world games

As someone who has never written a game on this scale before, I’d like to avoid bad architectural designs up front. While I do have experience writing games and a bunch of good coding practices from industry (which is not gamedev related, and strive for as clean code as pragmatically possible), doing things up right with a good architecture will save me massive amounts of pain down the road.

I have never done something like this, and I’d like to avoid hating myself later on with some fundamental bad decision. Are there any posts, talks, anything, that focus on how some developers approached open world games with many quests?

I am not interested in code examples, but high level concepts.

You also need not recommend threads on here like this as I’ve already gone through the resources/books listed here. The thing I’m looking for is specific to how large open world games avoid turning into a mess.

While this might be a thing that does not have much in the way of posts, then I’m more than happy to listen to any advice or experience you have provided it does not overlap with the link above.

website design – What UX decisions to make to promote civility online?

Folks aren’t as nice online as they are in person. Trying to find ways to mitigate this, a cursory search only turns up suggestions that each user can do to be more civil online. What UX decisions should a designer make to promote civility online? The only things I could think of are to require each user to use their real face and name for their account to “humanize” everyone on the site, but I think Facebook does this with only limited success?

Some context: I’m a teacher and I’m working online during the plague, and I want to know what design choices to make to make my class more personable/civil/human. But that’s mildly irrelevant here; I’m not really a part of the UX/design community, and I’m hoping that answers to this general question will give me some insight into the design world’s thoughts on online civility. And naturally if this question should be edited to be a better fit for the community, please do so :]

dnd 5e – What to do when I’m forced to make battle decisions by other players?

It sounds like you have a basically functional game and group with some tweaks that need doing, so no need for anything drastic yet.

I am often the dwarven battle cleric so I get myself into the same kinds of situations a lot. I know this frustration well. And here is the key, so does your high-WIS Druid. They know better in character too.

So here is the idea and it has worked well for me when playing in groups where I am not close friends with the other players: in-character post battle analysis. I emphasize the post battle part. Let combat play out how it will next time but afterwards when you are safe ask you if that could have gone better. Take that time to suggest how a decent plan b might have made things better. Make your case for being more than a wild shaped tank of HP for them to exploit.

Doing this after the battle means that no one is in danger. You aren’t suggesting to someone else that they need to get injured right now because you don’t want to. The stakes are lower and the goals are accomplished so you get to take a “ how to do better” approach and develop those characters some more.

If you want to deal with this out of character again do it after the battle with a “hey guys I’d like to be able to throw more spells in combat for my fun, so I don’t want to be wildshaped all the time.”

Again it sounds like you have a long standing group and game so you have some good will with everyone to work on making this game more fun for you. And maybe it will make it more fun for them as well.

Deciding on decisions behind C # access modifiers

I am currently writing a small language that belongs to me and I have examined the difference between the C ++ style, where the access modifier applies to a block of members, and C # / Java style, where the access modifier is specified separately for each member. I will not ask which is better; I realize that it is very much based on opinion.

Why does C # require an access modifier for each member?

I'm not trying to focus only on C # – it may be that he simply followed Java or the convention of another language, in which case the question might become “ Why this language need an access modifier for each member? & # 39;

I am looking for supporting documents, citations, etc. in which language designers discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each syntax and why they chose one over the other. I took a look at Google and couldn't find anything, but I'm aware that some members of Stack Overflow were actually part of the .Net development team , so I was hoping to find answers here.

5th dnd – What decisions can a player make when he performs a forced attack?

Spells do what they say they do

The creature uses its action to launch a melee attack …

They must make a "melee attack"; the spell does not require anything else. Therefore, the details depend on the character. If they target a friend, they can throw an unarmed strike to minimize the damage. If they target an enemy, they can do everything.

dnd 5th – Can the Creation spell create magic items? (Official decisions only)

This is not expected, but RAW creation can make magic items

As shown by DerekStucki's answer, Jeremy Crawford's now unofficial decision right here States:

The creation spell is not meant to create magic items.

Using RAW, we know that spells do what they say and that creation creates a "non-living object" or a "mineral object". This does not specify that they must be non-magical and without this clause, nothing prevents you from creating magic items.

A spell that Is explicitly prohibit magic items is true polymorph; as explained in this Question / Answer, a spell was created for the spell.

You turn the creature into a different creature, the creature into one not magic object, or the object in a creature

What we know about other methods of making magic items is in the Dungeon Master Guide, which says:

Creating a magic object is a long and expensive task …

And in the "Making Magic Items" section of the Guide to Everything Xanathar wrote:

Creating a magic object requires more than just time, effort and equipment. It is a long-term process that involves one or more adventures to find rare materials and the know-how necessary to create the article.

However, these rules consider crafting as a time-out activity. the creation spell already ignores these rules when creating mundane objects and therefore probably does not apply to the creation spell at all.

Because the creation spell does not explicitly forbid the creation of magic objects, you can create them.

5th dnd – How can I make sure that the decisions of my players have consequences?

In the last session, my players took part in what was supposed to be a relatively minor battle. The wizard miscalculated the strength of the enemies and used his two third-level spells, and the druid acted suboptimally, but in the character, using many of his healing spells to awaken unconscious enemies in sight of their interrogation.

The idea was that after this battle, they would enter the dungeon and make their way to the meeting with the boss, which would have consequences on the management of resources for these characters.

In fact, they ignored the entrance to the dungeon when they found it and decided to continue as they went. Maybe they could come back and take care of it later if they wanted to. Yes, I know it's something I should be better prepared for, but I thought I knew my players! (Usually they as killing things and picking up treasure …) The city they were heading to was more than a day trip, and I did not intend to do any other encounters along the road, so in the end I just said that they kept going up to the city, which meant that they were resting for a long time "for free" and did not have to go anywhere else. had no consequence of their decisions. (I do not try to punish them, but I think it's more interesting if they have to think about all these things and that they can not just blow up their spells a battle a day!)

How should I have handled this situation on the fly or during the preparations for the next sessions? Some ideas that I had afterwards:

  • Have the next group of foes come out of the dungeon and start a fight, trying to force the players to do what I wanted them to do. I feel I do not want to carry them too much by rail and I already have the impression of throwing them too much inevitable fighting.
  • Just keep talking about the dungeon's entrance until they decide to come in, telling them that they see things that look interesting to inside, or asking them if they are absolutely certain to want to keep walking. See above – railways. And I do not want to get to the point where I say, "Look, can you please do the thing I planned."
  • Let them continue as they please, but invent another fight that I had not planned to force them to run out of spells. See above – I do not really want to continue to force them to fight if they do not want to.
  • Do exactly what I did and let them pursue what they wanted, even if it frustrates me.
  • Something else, and if so what?

Tips for making good decisions | Promotion Forum

In my webmaster life and in normal life, I tend to make stupid decisions all the time. I suddenly do something crazy and after that, I cry.

An example: I bought two licenses Xenforo and I ask the team to remove the licenses and left forever. Now, I'm crying on why I did it.

So, guide me gently to make a good decision.