Game Development

OMGtechy

00:01

I should really use Gentoo; I just love compiling things from source

Jon

@SpartanDonut your first object pool tests?

taht is awesome

SpartanDonut

Yeah I've not really dealt with large numbers of objects before

I just used a stack

The decision was driven by my need to "spawn" a ton of objects at the same time which caused a huge performance dip

Jon

pooling is just one of those crucial things you need to know in game dev

SpartanDonut

I knew this day would come eventually

OMGtechy

I quickly found this with Unity too. In the end, I just made a generic pooler type that took a lambda and called it whenever it needed another object

and also had a starting size

Joe

00:07

im going to need to learn to do this

Jon

oh yeah, pooling in unity

is interesting

OMGtechy

first time I've written such a thing, although I've written similar things for other purposes in the past

it's quite satisfying :D

Icy Defiance

I first used an object pool when I made my own particle system. Optimizing that thing was some of the most fun I've had with programming.

I mean that non-sarcastically. It was great.

OMGtechy

yeah, that was the first time I ever touched upon it, although it was a highly specialsed pool rather than a generic one like this

You can make one for AIsteroids ;)

@OliverSalzburg hello

Icy Defiance

I might. :D but right now I just want a ship on the screen and a reference to a separate library where that ship can be controlled.

OMGtechy

00:09

indeed

I'll let you know when I get monogame up

might not be tonight, as it's already past midnight here

well technically, it's the next day already, but yaknow

Mono requires mono to build

ahahahah

Jon

pretty straight forward

OMGtechy

I wonder what it was like making the first assembler

SpartanDonut

The naive high level programmer inside me says it was likely a real pain in the ass

OMGtechy

I suppose it's all relative

Icy Defiance

one of my profs can interpret base-16 and base-8 numbers about as easily as base-10, just because it was required for the first so many years that he was programming

it's impressive to see

OMGtechy

00:20

I'm pretty used to base 16, but not base 8

I wonder what the world will be like when we're the old programmers

Icy Defiance

I'm "used" to hex. like I see 0xEE and I think that's about 95% of the way to 255. I can't just convert it to 238 instantly.

this prof can

OMGtechy

I wonder if video encoding will every move away from transform/quantize/entropy

@IcyDefiance ahh, well I can't do that

I see the hex number

not the base 10

Icy Defiance

lol actually I think about hex numbers in terms of colors, because that's where I see them most often

OMGtechy

sat at working trying to work out why someone wrong some_small_number & 0xFF

Icy Defiance

my first thought when I see 0xEE is "ah, so just slightly off-white"

OMGtechy

00:24

then realised it could in theory go above 0xFF

@IcyDefiance ahahaha

not quite 0xFF ;D

it seems to be that when I work with base 16 I think in base 16, but I struggle to read it as base 10

for example I use hex editors a lot at work to examine bit streams, but I have no idea what they say in base 10

Do you ever wonder what life would be like if we worked in a different base?

I mean it makes sense that we work in base 10, but what if we didn't...

SpartanDonut

►

Icy Defiance

there have been societies that used other bases

if I remember right, 12 and 40 were pretty common

"common"

SpartanDonut

Movie is about 12 (obviously)

and it talks about why it would be good

It's interesting anyway

OMGtechy

just look at the imperial system

Lokkij

Good enough for tonight.

SpartanDonut

00:37

Looks like LineRenderer?

OMGtechy

01:07

would you believe me if I said I was still trying to get mono sorted

SpartanDonut

You and Pip and your silly Linux builds

OMGtechy

i'm not on linux

on linux it is lovely and easy

bloody mac

SpartanDonut

haha ah

kill it with fire

OMGtechy

tempting

but then I can't build for iOS

SpartanDonut

mobile apps are just a fad. they'll go away in a year or two :P

OMGtechy

01:10

I can at least pretend I'm using linux until I want to do something useful

and yeah clearly :P

my other laptop is looking at me

tempting me in

saying "look, I have arch linux on me! life will be simple again!"

SpartanDonut

lol

I don't know what Pip does to make it so difficult

OMGtechy

it's like anything,; if you don't know what you're doing it's difficult

SpartanDonut

Sure

OMGtechy

he's just learning

arch can be quite fiddly if you're a linux novice

as it's very bare bones

it doesn't have an installer, it's just a livecd with some tools

SpartanDonut

That's what he said

and I made fun of that

because I can

:D

OMGtechy

01:13

it's by design, but for those who want a pretty basic setup, someone made a lovely tool

and aha :P

SpartanDonut

Why not go the way of Ubuntu? Desktop vs Server (headless) releases?

OMGtechy

There are pros and cons to each, neither is better IMO. If you want bleeding edge though, arch blows away the competition

if you want extreme stability, go use debian

if you want something in between, ubuntu maybe

SpartanDonut

I think you missed my point

Ubuntu has two releases

a desktop and a server version

OMGtechy

ok

SpartanDonut

the server version is basic / headless

Which is what it sounds like Arch is

OMGtechy

01:15

does it come with a GUI?

SpartanDonut

Desktop does

OMGtechy

server?

SpartanDonut

no

OMGtechy

might look into that then

SpartanDonut

headless means no gui

OMGtechy

01:16

I just like arch because it comes with pretty much nothing when compared to other distros

and it's bleeding edge

SpartanDonut

Certainly

OMGtechy

it feels like your own mini distro :P

SpartanDonut

I just feel like the lack of an installer / requiring a 3rd party tool is a silly move

I understand the reasoning...

but just do what Ubuntu did and have two versions

OMGtechy

mmm, but then since the whole point of arch is to be "just enough to switch on + tools EVERYONE needs"

SpartanDonut

Problem solved :D

OMGtechy

01:17

well, this other project does a great job

SpartanDonut

That sounds like a silly point to not have an installer

OMGtechy

it would be odd if it did IMO

it just wouldn't feel right

I remember configuring it all manually myself, it was a great learning experience. Not for the faint hearted though, but the arch isn't

SpartanDonut

But why?

I'm not saying the installer needs checkboxes for every little thing a desktop user might want

OMGtechy

I have two Ubuntu 14.04 VMs on a Windows 7 PC, a Windows 8.1 PC, a Mac, and my arch laptop

SpartanDonut

Pip said the 3rd party thing included the ability to set up your parition

Is it so wrong to want a GUI for something like that?

I guess it's probably a matter of priorities for development

OMGtechy

01:19

there is no GUI, that's the point

you don't get one

SpartanDonut

Installer != OS

But I suppose

OMGtechy

when your'e install arch, the process is pretty much this...

set up network

partition stuff

mount

chroot into machine

at this point you have the most basic system there could be

there's not even a kernel on it ahahahah

then you pull down the base install with the package manager and kernel etc on it

let that set up

then you're done

it's pretty much like ssh-ing into a machine, only the machine doesn't have ssh

SpartanDonut

Why can't there be a command based installer to set up steps... well you didn't provide numbers but up to the point of chroot into the machine

OMGtechy

Sure there could be, there are many

SpartanDonut

*not included

OMGtechy

01:23

indeed, but you can quite happily get one if you want it

SpartanDonut

Just seems silly

OMGtechy

arch = "sure, if you want it go get it"

I do see your point

SpartanDonut

I have to assume Arch simply doesn't care about user adoption and it was made for other reasons which is fine

OMGtechy

but since it's not aimed at novices as such, most are quite content without

it's not trying to be ubuntu

as in get all teh users!

SpartanDonut

well

I dunno

If I make something that is intended for extremely computer savvy people I still wouldn't want to make the barrier of entry that high

but that's just my personal opinion

Like I said, apparently Arch has other motivations

But I feel like the barrier of entry could still be low AND meet those goals

Because, as I said, installer != OS

OMGtechy

01:27

yeah I understand what your'e saying

I guess people just aren't that bothered, and those who are just use the 3rd party stuff

SpartanDonut

But realistically you're probably right. If I don't know all the commands for partitioning, setting up the network, etc. I'm not going to make it far once the OS is installed

OMGtechy

ooo I have a quote from the FAQ

> Arch needs an installer. Maybe a GUI installer?
Since installation doesn't occur often (read the rest of this article to know more about what rolling release means), it is not a high priority for developers or users. The Installation guide and Beginners' guide have been fully updated to use the command-line method. If you're still interested in using an installer, consider using Archboot.

SpartanDonut

Doesn't mean I'm not lazy and would like assistance from the software to get me there

That's really not a good answer :P

But at least they have good documentation (supposedly)

Icy Defiance

with this new uefi vs bios crap I've been finding myself going into the command-line to install any operating system, including windows, just because the installer fails hard

SpartanDonut

I've had no problems =/

Icy Defiance

01:30

installer is definitely a lot nicer though

SpartanDonut

My biggest gripe with command line based installers, it means I need either:

1) knowledge to do it without documentation
2) Physical documentation (book, print outs, etc.)
3) a second device for looking up the documentation

OMGtechy

agreed

SpartanDonut

I'm now at a point in my life where that's not an issue but it was a big gripe of mine when smart phones weren't around and I had one computer

OMGtechy

but then most people have another device nowadays

a phone if nothing else

plus there's always --help

SpartanDonut

If you know about it

OMGtechy

01:32

and cat README | more

SpartanDonut

I'm just speaking in general now, not against arch fyi

OMGtechy

well, yeah, but that's like saying you can run the installer if you know how to put the pc in plug in

SpartanDonut

As a computer user I should be able to do everything I need to from my active computer session

OMGtechy

I think arch comes with a command line web broswer on the cd

SpartanDonut

fancy

OMGtechy

01:33

I remember using it once when I didn't have my phone handy

it worked very well

SpartanDonut

that's good to hear

OMGtechy

but if you need to look up how to set up wifi then your'e screwed aha

SpartanDonut

which I would be :P

Arch is not for me needless to say ;)

I really should install a Linux dev box just for fun and so that I can boot into it if I were ever so inclined and actually be able to speak to the process a little bit

OMGtechy

I wouldn't ever recommend arch as someones first linux box put it that way

I think Ubuntu covers that nicely

or fedora

or even linux mint

SpartanDonut

I used Ubuntu in high school (feisty fawn was the first distro) and I don't remember what I had a class on in college

Mint was one I was looking at several years ago

I think I used fedora in college

OMGtechy

01:36

One thing people seem to fear when using linux is the terminal

once you get used to it though it's lovely

SpartanDonut

I don't fear the terminal but I certainly want a desktop to support my use of the terminal

I use powershell all the time for work

OMGtechy

much like keyboard shortcuts in a text editor

SpartanDonut

yep

OMGtechy

right now I'm just gunna hate on ma mac

SpartanDonut

:D

OMGtechy

01:37

screw it, I'll just use a release package

SpartanDonut

Which you probably should have done in the first place ;)

OMGtechy

pros and cons

SpartanDonut

cons... can't edit the source?

pros - it works

*until you want to edit the source

OMGtechy

and if you find there is a bug you have to go get the source anyway

I've found with Ubuntu the packages are so out of date I just go for the source automatically

but then I'm working on bleeding edge stuff so

SpartanDonut

That's fair

I want to thank you for having a civilized conversation with me by the way

It's a lovely thing

OMGtechy

01:39

I think the fact is that I'm quite comfortable building from source now I know what I'm doing (although not on a mac apparently)

I'm more comfortable building from source than I am fucking with apt-get

<3

clearly you should be on the language committee aha

SpartanDonut

What language committee?

Sorry if I ruined the joke :P

OMGtechy

mine :D

aha

SpartanDonut

lol ah yes

OMGtechy

the function syntax is finally sorted

SpartanDonut

But seriously... flame wars are so obnoxious. I like to share and discuss / debate opinions but it's always risky when you don't know you're audience

OMGtechy

01:41

indeed

just bring up religion on here... ahahahah

SpartanDonut

I chose to edit out a sarcastic "praise jesus" comment I made earlier... I think it was today.

What's your final function syntax so I can shoot it down? :P

OMGtechy

ahah

well

it's not perfect, but one of the decisions I made was that if I carried on like this I'd never get it done, so I went for this

SpartanDonut

lol

OMGtechy

foo = int(int a, int b)
    return a + b

even more like a variable

in fact, in the spec I'm writing, a function is a variable

SpartanDonut

I presume the "type" then is int(int,int)

OMGtechy

01:44

not sure if I'll make them implicitly const or not

SpartanDonut

I think Icy proposed that

OMGtechy

yes

SpartanDonut

cool

OMGtechy

indeed

SpartanDonut

I think I can be on board with that

OMGtechy

01:44

see, I do listen :P

SpartanDonut

haha

OMGtechy

the type is inferred; you can be extra verbose if you want

Icy Defiance

what if you type "bar(a, b)" and bar isn't a function? :O

OMGtechy

well, the same as any other language, error :P

Icy Defiance

before or after compiling/runtime?

SpartanDonut

01:45

It would have to look for ambiguous calls. If it can't find a function or a type (or if there is a conflict) error appropriately at compile time

OMGtechy

in the reference compiler, at compile time

one very interesting problem that comes up as a result is function overloading

Icy Defiance

what I mean is it would be hard for an IDE to pick up

but maybe not impossible

I'm not sure

OMGtechy

not at all

it's quite simple

does the type overload the function call operator? No? Error

C++ does it that way and it's lovely

Icy Defiance

ooh, now that you phrase it that way, that is cool

OMGtechy

struct Foo
{
    bool operator () () { return true; }
};

I think that's the C++ syntax IIRC

atm I'm wondering how to define the basic types like int etc

fixed size or not etc

SpartanDonut

01:48

Use C# standards :P

OMGtechy

ahahahah

SpartanDonut

Seriously

It honestly sounds like you are making a nice C# / JS hybrid that I'll love

OMGtechy

I'm glad to hear it

Icy Defiance

I'm with Donut there, just because people are used to it. If you want a number that isn't fixed size, maybe have a bigint type for that.

SpartanDonut

If you could make your language compile as .NET assemblies that would be great

CLR or whatever it is

I can't remember

Icy Defiance

01:50

IL

SpartanDonut

takes abstraction to the extreme

IL yes

that's the one

right... CLR is the runtime xD

it's in the name

OMGtechy

I do plan on making it at least possible

reference compiler will be LLVM

but it's just a reference

SpartanDonut

sure

OMGtechy

but in regards to type sizes, I have this paranoia that I don't know the size of an int...but every language known to man seems to manage just fine so I should just chill the hell out

Icy Defiance

Furious, Google Ends Anti-Piracy Cooperation with the MPAA: torrentfreak.com/…

this is actually pretty funny

SpartanDonut

01:52

Maybe MS will pick this up in a few years and just make the features I want of your language standard in C# 10 or something

OMGtechy

Maybe ;)

Aspect-Decorated C# Clean

SpartanDonut

but the ?. operator is here! :D

Or on its way or something

I know people use it. Don't know when I can use it

OMGtechy

what is it again

SpartanDonut

trying to find the docs

but basically it's a null safe operator

OMGtechy

also I'm written an article on MI if you're interested?

SpartanDonut

01:54

so like...

int? myNullableInt = someObject?.child1?.child2?.child3?.IntProperty won't blow up if anything up the chain is null

Which will be especially use for boolean logic

OMGtechy

WTF IS THAT

I look at that and have no idea what it does

which is generally a bad sign

SpartanDonut

if (someObject?.ToString() == "Some String")
is essentially the same as
if (someObject != null && someObject.ToString() == "Some String")

int? is a nullable int if that helps

because if one of the objects is null, null is returned

int myInt = someObject.child1.child2.child3.IntProperty blows up if someObject or child1 or child2 or child3 is null

OMGtechy

ohhh

that makes more sense

I do know of the type? syntax and occasionally use it

but now you put it that way, it makes a little more sense

SpartanDonut

ah here we go - msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/dn802602.aspx

Doesn't appear to be in official MSDN docs yet (that I can find) so it's on it's way I guess

Transcript for