quote:Original post by Fuzztrek
I've found that most people don't know about anything other than limiting the frame-rate. Even I thought that was the only way to go about it, and after posting here many people told me to do that. However, other made valid points against doing so, and I think everyone learned from that post. Educating people about other (better) methods seems more worthwhile, to me at least. Theory is a large part of programming. You could argue that it is against my ethics to blindly give out solutions (not saying that I have all the answers, not at all.)
[edited by - Fuzztrek on March 30, 2004 5:38:52 PM]
Agreed. I was just casually stating that since his true reason of wanting to limit the FPS, and it's ultimate purpose wasn't stated, to conclude or theorize on his motive for doing so is generally bad. If he did want to limit it to some locked number (say, 15fps) he would have to use some sort of time-dependent stalling procedure. Hell, I did and it pointed out a huge flaw in my collision code that I probably wouldn't have found until much later. It would have taken me a while just to troubleshoot the reason too had I not known what I did to cause that jump in error. If he wanted to be in frame synch or scale movement speed,etc. then yes, it would be more sound to use time based movement control. It's a little tricky in some cases, and he/she may want to research the fixed time step based physics algorithms too if he/she feels so inclined.
This is one of those times where it's necessary to include a reason for doing what you're asking, so that the people here can properly understand your predicament and remedy it without inner-arguing
[edited for clarity]
[edited by - sordid on March 31, 2004 12:59:47 PM]
