3 ms·
This is really good for comparing different eras if game design. But damn, when will the gaming community realize they need something like GC?
by Ericson2314 8y ago
This is really good for comparing different eras if game design. But damn, when will the gaming community realize they need something like GC?
- Ericson2314 8y agoThe SQL bit is also good. Basically somebody needs to bring capability ideology (highly related to magic pointer types in Rust, btw) to relational data organization to limit access patterns (no arbitrary joins) which will both allow for more modularity and perhaps distributed DBs that actually scale.
- adamch 8y agoYour suggestion reminds me of Eve [1]. I remember when I first read the design/explainers, the closest analogy I could make was "all variables are backed by a database, and all manipulations are SQL". Not a very accurate statement, but it's how I wrapped my head around it. [1] http://witheve.com/ http://witheve.com/
- paulddraper 8y agoIs that like PostgreSQL's row-level security?
- Rusky 8y ago> But damn, when will the gaming community realize they need something like GC? I-- what does this even mean?? On the one hand, they don't need something like GC, as this clearly shows. Many larger games can't afford it, and wouldn't really benefit if they could, since they've already worked out more special-purpose access patterns. And on the other hand, those games that can afford it often do use it already- Unity games are written in C#, UE4 has a limited GC for game objects, Minecraft was written in Java, tons of games use scripting languages like Lua for gameplay logic.