Game Development

@0x00004 Smart pointers are harder because you need to think about ownership properly, but that's the whole point. Otherwise you will be leaking memory, guaranteed. If you already now start writing code without any news or any deletes, you'll be much better off in the future. I do not really want to touch my old game's codebase anymore because it uses rawpointers, and its a nightmare to manage memory there.

user92578

Raw pointers are good for passing around nullable instances, or storing stuff in a class etc., but a raw pointer should never ever own memory

user92578

Banning new & delete is an easy way to guarantee that

0x00004

9:15 AM

so in short i should never use "delete" and "new"?

user92578

yup

user92578

raw pointers are fine but not for ownership

user92578

std::observer_ptr might remove the need for those completely, but I can't manage to find a reference as to when/if that might get into the standard

0x00004

10:20 AM

and just dont forget to null ptr in case i dont need them anymore?

trollingchar

why null pointer

user92578

what

0x00004

i mean when i m done working with raw pointers

or there s no need to null them ?

trollingchar

when you assign null to raw pointer, nothing happens

you are not freeing any memory

0x00004

yes i know

i guess if i use smart pointers there wont be need for that

trollingchar

10:29 AM

and there are no reference counting on raw pointer so assigning null does not decrement reference count

this is just not needed

user92578

I've always considered assigning null to pointers as a code smell, and yeah, its unnecessary with smart pointers

trollingchar

if you own the object then delete it else do nothing

user92578

No! Dont delete

user92578

Ban delete and new from your codebase

trollingchar

smart pointers take advantage of RAII and they-

I haven't finished!

I was going to say, with smart pointers you can avoid new/delete at all

0x00004

10:33 AM

@trollingchar for example :

while(object){//do that}

and if you null that object that chunk of code wont process

wrong actually

i mean

trollingchar

do you really need a loop here?

0x00004

i null raw pointers when i use something like *currentEnemy

nwp

@0x00004 I think I know what you mean and it's correct. some_unique_ptr = nullptr; is a way to say "Clean up whatever you're holding". It's rarely needed though.

0x00004

so that i can use that pointer for several objects

user92578

Calling reset feels cleaner but might just be me

nwp

10:38 AM

If you use the pointer for another object why do you null it first?

0x00004

here s an example from my code:

if (m_player)
		{
			m_player->update();
		}

and if i just write : player->update() the code will no longer work if that players gets removed

trollingchar

does "removed" means "destroyed and memory freed"?

0x00004

not always

if i dont null m_player that code above wont work

trollingchar

I think you can also use return or break to prevent code from running

0x00004

also if i remember well it prevents object from being deleted several times

@trollingchar i never tried. Maybe

tigrou

11:10 AM

https://docs.unity3d.com/ScriptReference/Quaternion.Euler.html
It says : "Returns a rotation that rotates z degrees around the z axis, x degrees around the x axis, and y degrees around the y axis; applied in that order."

However (AFAIK) to do the same rotation in 3 separate steps you must do it in reverse order :
Quaternion q = qY * qX * qZ;
Why is it so ?

I have created a JSfiddle that illustrate this : https://jsfiddle.net/b19zg6ew/1/

0x00004

:53683849 int *a = new int(5);
	int *ptr = a;
	delete ptr;

	if (ptr)
	{
		std::cout << a << std::endl;
	}

if(ptr) condition wont work here but it will if you null ptr

Sorry. If(ptr)condition will work here even though ptr and a were deleted. It wont work if you nullptr.

trollingchar

just remove that if block because the condition is always false

I have trouble understanding what you are trying to achieve

0x00004

you mean in my code?

@trollingchar how come if condition works as long as poniter is valid?

pointer*

trollingchar

11:26 AM

you are probably using some other condition to decide if it should be deleted

why not to use it for other stuff related to this pointer

if (should_delete) {
    delete p;
}
else {
    p->whatever();
}

if (should_delete) {
    delete p;
    return;
}
p->whatever();

0x00004

why bring another boolean variable if you can just null ptr to make object invalid

user92578

This whole conversation gets obsolete if you start using smart pointers or std::optional

trollingchar

@0x00004 it's the initial decision when the object is valid initially

Anyway, I don't like to mess with all this: maybe it's null and maybe not, and it may be deleted anywhere and may be not

You either want to use an object or to delete it, but not both

But you want both

nwp

Final Fantasy VII Remake Demo for free on PS4.

It's very pretty.

0x00004

11:44 AM

@trollingchar its not that way.

nwp

@trollingchar Bethesda would like to hire you.

0x00004

12:05 PM

@trollingchar it can be used for example where you need to respawn player in case it dies so you update, draw it etc only as long as it lives

and in case it dies you respawn him

trollingchar

so it's just some kind of optional value

then it's probably ok, but not ok for me

and null pointer just serves as marker in your case

I remember my unfinished bullet hell on C#, there was the player variable too, and checked by some attacks/homing bullets

c# has garbage collector so I fortunately don't have to worry so much about memory ownership

but anyway, using null as some marker and assigning null before variable goes out of scope is two entirely different things

in your case, variable does not go out of scope

2 hours later…

Vaillancourt

2:47 PM

Hello!

Elva

Heya

Vaillancourt

Feels like the spring will be around soon!

This also means that it's going to smell dog poo for some time due to it thawing.

Pikalek

Feels similar here. I hope it's a slow, tapered thaw, as our flood forecast is a bit more concerning this year.

Vaillancourt

@Pikalek Ah, that must be a real annoyance to live with that :/

Pikalek

3:02 PM

It's better than it used to be. Prediction has gotten better, there's more mitigation in place, almost all of the most flood prone houses have been swapped to green spaces & it's happened recently enough that people don't brush it off as something that happened way back in the pioneering days. But it still puts a strain on things.

If we or up watershed areas get a lot of early spring rain, things will go poorly though.

Vaillancourt

Yeah, I wish you the best of luck with that :)

Pikalek

Thanks! Honestly, it seems preferable to the covid outbreaks; the devil you know & all that.

Vaillancourt

Yeah

« first day (3497 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (1536 days later) »

all rooms