Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Banner advertising on our site currently available from just $5!


1. Learn about the promo. 2. Sign up for GDNet+. 3. Set up your advert!


Pink Horror

Member Since 02 Jul 2013
Offline Last Active Jul 26 2015 05:41 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: What would you be willing to trade to get your ideal job in the gaming industry?

03 July 2015 - 07:32 PM


Not only that, but all of the greats in history all spent significantly more than an 8 hour work day working on their dreams and desires. Mozart, Einstein, John Coltrane, Leonardo DaVinci, Charles Darwin, and countless had worked so many hours, put all of their energy and time into what they loved, and they turned out to be the best of their kind.

 

Which one of those guys is famous for dreaming up what his ideal job would be and what he would give up for it?


In Topic: Best approach for long computations, threading or timeslicing?

02 July 2015 - 11:10 AM


In this day and age, I would suggest to just make them async. Be careful of dispatching new work faster than they get processed.

In theory I would suggest std::future but it is my understanding it has no "is result ready" call so I'm afraid you will have to go with std::thread.

 

Does the OP say he needs an "is result ready" function? It's unfortunate that the std::future is missing a typical feature, but you don't always need that function. Whenever I have used jobs, I have not needed to poll for when they are finished. I just put the wait where the result is needed.


In Topic: Is it really as simple as read a book and then try to figure things out?

23 June 2015 - 01:05 PM

I will point out that no programmer I know would call the ability to type a part of a programmer's skill (except you, apparently - have you never taken a paper exam where you programmed?) and syntax is tangential at best to what I, at least, mean when I refer to "programming." We don't measure the skill of a programmer by their typing speed, we measure it by what they actually accomplish and how.

 

Really? I know plenty of programmers who appear to focus on learning all of the IDE shortcuts and macros available to speed up code generation, while putting no effort into learning algorithms or learning any programming language in more depth. I believe that all falls under prioritizing "the ability to type". Granted, I don't consider any of these people I know to be good programmers, but they exist.


In Topic: what really get and set do?

23 June 2015 - 11:01 AM


the basic type foo {get;set;} is mostly not that great, unless you want to refactor later and change have the property do something else (like raise an event when changed or something). But the syntax does let you do things like type foo {get; private set;}, which I like as a fairly nice way of having a public facing readonly property without a second member variable declaration.

 

Yes, I was commenting on the typical usage of just putting "{get; set;}" on the end of variables. There are some more useful things you can do with the syntax - access restriction and overriding inherited properties are both possible. But doing it just to refactor later makes little sense to me, unless you are really concerned that your variable will be used in reference parameters everywhere. You can refactor from a variable as well. You don't have to start with a property to be allowed to refactor something.


In Topic: what really get and set do?

23 June 2015 - 10:16 AM

By making x into a property, you prevent it from being used as a reference parameter.

 

I personally don't see much of the point in auto-implemented properties in C#. When I first saw C# had properties, I thought the whole point was to make something that had the same syntax as a public member variable, so for refactoring purposes you could easily switch between the two choices. In my opinion, that should have made public member variables more acceptable. I guess that didn't happen, which could be why this was added into C# in version 3.0.


PARTNERS