Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Siquo]

How on earth is it possible to do stuff without pointers?!

Every time I try to make local objects, but every time I eventually have to go back to using pointers

[GlyphGryph]

I don't even understand the point of /ever/ using non-pointers. In fact, the whole concept of copying being standard behaviour boggles me.

This might be because I'm a Rubyist by profession, and like most interpreted languages everything is done by reference by default.

[Virex]

The reason for that is that C++ doesn't distinguish between objects and built-in types. A variable containing an object actually contains the object, not a reference to the object. So, since the object is treated like any other compound type, it just gets copied whole and ends up on the stack. It's one of those close-to-the-metal things C++ is known for.

[MorleyDev]

I don't even understand the point of /ever/ using non-pointers. In fact, the whole concept of copying being standard behaviour boggles me.

This might be because I'm a Rubyist by profession, and like most interpreted languages everything is done by reference by default.

Stack allocation is generally faster than heap allocation. Couple this with if something is about 16 bytes or smaller, it's more speed-efficient to copy by value than to pass a const reference in situations where the compiled can't optimise away the reference/copy (obviously copying logic in an object destroys this statistic somewhat). For the role of C++ (and the time it originated) using values by default makes sense.

Whilst a (JIT or otherwise) compiler in modern times can often make a reasonably intelligent decision about allocating objects on stack vs heap, it can't always. And in those situations, you have to either use a much less expressive and intuitive design (which tends to increase the chance of bugs and unreadable code. Which is bad.), or accept you want to do something the language isn't suited for and move to a different language. This is why C# has the struct, which basically scream in the compiler's ear "This should probably go on the stack!".

To use the lowest hanging fruit example, the "first instinct implementation" of a functional mathematical Vector class in Java tends to be very inefficient because the compiler still doesn't/can't make intelligent enough decisions about it. You get a lot of slowdown from the Vectors being new'd and collected, as the Project Zomboid developers learned the hard way...

[Siquo]

Stack allocation is generally faster than heap allocation.

I knowww..... but there appear to be SO FEW use cases, and so much recycling of already allocated heap can be done!

[MorleyDev]

Nowadays yeah, with Moore's law and those optimisations C++ simply isn't needed for a lot of projects. But back between when C grew up? A lot of the optimisations made by managed languages were pipe dreams. The trade-off in memory or CPU was just too much of a precious resource to waste. So C++ took the C approach, and even when C++ was first developed it was still the better way. All other things being equal, well-optimised C++ will still win in most situations against other languages being well-optimised, but thanks to Moore's law we don't need to make those optimisations and the advantages from a business perspective provided by using languages like C# means you wouldn't use C++ anyway in a lot of business situations. That potential speed just isn't worth the time and risks.

At work we use C# to manage our servers and it works beautifully. We're needing to optimise the legacy code, but C# itself isn't the issue there. We've just learnt a lot about better ways to code. In fact one of the "discoveries" is that simple, well designed and loosely coupled code in C# is more than efficient enough. No need for those clever hacks, simple code is beautiful.

[Nadaka]

Fortunately for java 99% of the time, heap space is already allocated. One of the few places where java slightly outperforms standard c++ is in the creation and destruction of a large number of objects on the heap.

[MorleyDev]

Which still doesn't work for functional code vs the stack, hence why a Vector2 that's functional is a bad idea...

Anyway, sudden change of topic: Has anybody else had immense trouble getting CMake to work for MinGW? Even when I completely clear the Path so the MinGW compiler is the only thing on it, I get errors related to the CreateProcess function

EDIT: Nevermind, running
"C:\cmake\bin\cmake" -G "MinGW Makefiles" -DCMAKE_MAKE_PROGRAM="C:\Mingw\bin\make" from sh.exe of all things worked 0_o I'm just gonna throw my hands up and say "fuck it, it works".

[eerr]

So what do people use for graphics? I just want something fast and non confusing with transparency. Is Unity reasonable?

[Skyrunner]

I use SDL+libtcod for ASCII-like games!
And Allegro seems to be nifty for 2D graphics. Unity is C#/C++(paid) IIRC...
SDL+(lots of extra libraries) or SMFL are reasonable choices, too.
3D graphics go either Unity or OpenGL, usually o_O

[alway]

So what do people use for graphics? I just want something fast and non confusing with transparency. Is Unity reasonable?

Unity is a piece of cake. Here's the basics: http://www.unity3dstudent.com/category/modules/essential-skills/
As for speed, it's not the fastest thing out there, but it's more than reasonable for pretty much anyone whose game isn't based entirely around physics or other high-demand processes. Even Kerbal Space Program uses it.

Additionally, while the Unity Pro version does cost money, the normal version is free. The main differences being a few advanced features are cut from the normal version, as well as having a splash screen and small logo onscreen.

It goes really well with Maya, if you have that already. I haven't tried it with Blender, but I suspect it would be just as easy, what with Blender exporting to pretty much every file imaginable due to being open source.

TBH, Unity is a great choice for most beginners, as it requires very little programming knowledge, and the features it doesn't support are really only used by more advanced coders anyway. It's also great for prototyping.


However, if you want to have stories to tell your kids about how 'back in my day, we had to code uphill both ways in the snow,' learn DirectX or OpenGL with shaders first. Doing that before going to university pretty much pushed me up to the top of my class for that year's students. Because after graphics programming, any other programming seems trivial.

[Valid_Dark]

RAAAAAAAAAAAAGEEEEEEE
so I finally finish the first release of this one program,
I compile it and run it, everything goes smoothly,
but then I go to run it from the .exe and it doesn't run,  double check that all resources and .dll's are in place, they are, try running it again, doesn't run.
Copy all of the code, start new project, paste all of the code, move every item from that folder into new project folder, build and run, and that won't even run from inside the IDE,  a little bit of debugging points out that it's having an issue loading a certain PNG, it's in the right place.
why would it run in the IDE in one instance of the code, but not the other?

Nevermind, fixed it,
was missing zlib,  this is the second project where for somereason I leave out zlib and it makes me go on a rage for 2 hours trying to fix shit.
fuck you zlib1.dll I hate you.

[alway]

Dunno which platform, but it could be an issue with directories it's searching.

As for why it wasn't running from the .exe: the IDE will likely treat it as if it is in a different location. Typically it treats it like it is in the main folder of your project, but the actual .exe is stored in a subdirectory. On CodeBlocks work, the .exe is in ./bin/Release/program.exe, while the IDE treats it like it is in ./program.exe. This will break any relative paths.

[Siquo]

So what do people use for graphics? I just want something fast and non confusing with transparency. Is Unity reasonable?

SFML is a valid option, it's like a lightweight SDL.

I'm just gonna throw my hands up and say "fuck it, it works".

And that is how you Make.

[Valid_Dark]

Dunno which platform, but it could be an issue with directories it's searching.

As for why it wasn't running from the .exe: the IDE will likely treat it as if it is in a different location. Typically it treats it like it is in the main folder of your project, but the actual .exe is stored in a subdirectory. On CodeBlocks work, the .exe is in ./bin/Release/program.exe, while the IDE treats it like it is in ./program.exe. This will break any relative paths.

yes, the IDE treats it as if it's not in /bin/ sub directory, but zlib.dll wasn't in that folder, and it was working from the IDE, I tried copying everything from that folder multiple times to the subdirectories where the .exe's were and it never worked, so zlib wasn't there but it still ran though the IDE.
but w/e doesn't matter, it works now.