crafn

7 ms·

1.
by crafn 11y ago
> A serious C++ engine with a "data oriented" design would have the same arrays of primitive types and dumb structs as its C counterpart, merely dressed as std::vector or std::array Yeah, I agree. Including the "full C++&q
2.
by crafn 11y ago
Absolutely you should take the text with a grain of salt. The reasons I chose C are very personal. I can entertain the idea that my desire for simplicity is just a fad. I suspect that I wouldn't move to something like Python (I use it
3.
by crafn 11y ago
Good that I succeeded at avoiding ranting. I find it really hard to keep from throwing absolutes. Almost everything is possible with C++, that's true. Some things require a lot of engineering though. Like full program reflection, fast
4.
by crafn 11y ago
>Take a look at the games made in Unity. Plenty of AAA or close to AAA games. Cities Skylines, Firewatch, Ori and the Blind Forest, Pollen, Endless Legend. I think we may have differing standards. I've only played one of those, Ori,
5.
by crafn 11y ago
Two reasons: Creative interests which make traditional game engines a hard fit. I could make compromises to the design, but as I also have technical interest in making game engines, it's a double win.
6.
by crafn 11y ago
The need for high performance meets with my creative interests. (But I also have technical interest in making the engine). I also value the ability of being able to implement extraordinary features to the engine in a whim, which is hard wit
7.
by crafn 11y ago
>These are fairly outrageous claims, and it all smells of total burnout, and losing sight of the forest for the trees, to me. Maybe, I don't know. I have been a lot happier with C though, while still writing some C++ code during the
8.
by crafn 11y ago
I get where that comes from. I surely did have the disconnection some years back, but think I'm on a better track now. Thanks for the link.
9.
by crafn 11y ago
Author here. I'm positively surprised, constructive discussion on internet! There's been some discussion about using Rust. Rust is an interesting language, and has definitely potential substituting C and C++ in some domains. The m
10.
by crafn 11y ago
There's a lot of tricks you can do to optimize build times, and I've tried most of them in my previous game engine. Got ~90kloc recompilation time from 15min to something like a few minutes, although that required rewriting a bunc
11.
by crafn 11y ago
Maybe, I don't know. This is just me trying to minimize the unnecessary pain and suffering while waiting for a better language to arrive. In that context arguing which bad solution is less worse seems somewhat pointless, and also depen
12.
by crafn 11y ago
I started thinking about it, but quite fast decided to roll my own self-contained system. Not because it was an informed decision, but felt more fun :P
13.
by crafn 11y ago
Compile times are not a problem in small codebases. Try to compile a 100kloc codebase using templates generously. Even your link times will easily grow over 10 seconds. Maybe even a minute. And 100kloc is still a pretty small codebase in te
14.
by crafn 11y ago
Yeah, and what's left is not much of C++. See my post about runtime recompiling for arguments to use C compiler instead of a very limited subset of C++. (References make the type system more complex for little benefit. Templates create
15.
by crafn 11y ago
When you drop the semantic silliness of C++, like having the container to take care of constructing, copying, moving, and destructing, not to mention exception safety, a basic implementation of a "templated" dynamic array implemen
16.
by crafn 11y ago
That's partly true. However, you do get rid of the complexity you never wanted in the first place. For me this is OOP, RAII, C++ allocators, exceptions, references, vtables (see my post about runtime recompiling), templates (mostly), C
17.
by crafn 11y ago
It's quite restricted still. For example changing datatypes during recompilation is problematic, at least if you don't destroy the instances before reloading, and re-instantiate afterwards. I don't bother to do that, because
18.
by crafn 11y ago
Sure, although I don't have a separate server. Explanation here: http://pastebin.com/Nm6Qta4u
19.
by crafn 11y ago
There are some arguments to stick with C instead of a very C-like subset of C++. Off the top of my head: - Recompiling and reloading parts of your game at run-time is quite easy in C. In C++ you have to make sure (at least) that nobody has
20.
by crafn 11y ago
From gamedev perspective: Every time I've prototyped something on a GC'd language (java, actionscript, javascript, ..) I soon find myself optimizing memory allocations and not making the game because the GC causes too much overhea