• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Flonk

To cool for return

6 posts in this topic

So I was joyfully working on my CG assignment when I came about this little piece of code:

void Exercise13::lerp(
    float & result,
    const float & a,
    const float & b,
    const float & t)
{
    \\My Code
    result = ((1-t)*a)+(t*b);
}

So in effect they not only have a function that teaches the students to code in a horrible way (and yes, some have adopted such quirks), they have even made it harder for the compiler to inline a function that would be trivially inlinable.

Also, since we are working on 32bit machines or higher the whole pass by reference won't do anything to improve memory load (since the address will be just as large as a float). The only thing that would save this memory load would be... inlining.

Now I hope that my compiler is smart enough to figure this out, but shouldn't we just use language features?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I went through the whole code, not just the part where we are supposed to fill in the blanks, and I turned up some more gems:

void Exercise13::quat(
    float q[4],
    const float m[16])
{   
    \\Turns a 4x4 rotation matrix into quaternions
}

But then I found something even better:

"mathmacros.h"

It seems like this file is used over multiple projects and was just casually thrown in for us.

Some highlights:

#include <cmath>


#define _PI 3.1415926535897932384626433832795L
#define _PI2  (_PI * 2.00L)
#define _PI_2 (_PI * 0.50L)
#define _PI4  (_PI * 4.00L)
#define _PI_4 (_PI * 0.25L)

\\snip


#define _randf(min, max) \
    (static_cast<float>(rand()) / RAND_MAX * ((max) - (min)) + (min))

#define _rand(min, max) \
    (static_cast<int>(static_cast<float>(rand()) / RAND_MAX * ((max) - (min)) + (min)))

\\Seeded in main.cpp with:     srand(time(NULL));

Although the rand() thing may just be me listening to this talk about rand().

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Can't believe _PI__2 was omitted, which is obviously (_PI * _PI).

 

Still laughing...

 

You want all your instructors to be amazing programmers, and to impart their wisdom to everyone.  What you may learn instead is that they don't have a clue what they are doing.  

 

It's good for you.  Builds character.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


So in effect they not only have a function that teaches the students to code in a horrible way (and yes, some have adopted such quirks), they have even made it harder for the compiler to inline a function that would be trivially inlinable.

 

Not to mention that this function could have easily been turned into a constexpression on a modern c+11-compiler, which would make the runtime cost even more trivial and the usage even more easy, if return value & pass-by-value was used... but not with this beauty here. Also, I think using references here makes it even harder for the compiler, because it now has to assume that a, b and t could point to the same value, which AFAIK applies some restrictions. Don't beat me if I'm wrong, not an expert in this field...

 

Wasn't there a thread somewhere here in coding horrors already about how universities can sometimes teach really bad stuff? I mean, this is a whole other level, I thought my programming courses where botched because the singleton was tought as first and most important design pattern...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Constexpr wouldn't work, since the t stands for time, so no compile time resolution.

And as to the aliasing of the parameters: your compiler will gladly shoot your foot.

void Exercise13::lerp(
    float & result,
    const float & a,
    const float & b,
    const float & t)
{
    result = 0.0;
    result += ((1-t)*a);
    result += (t*b);
}

In the above example, if result and b are the same address we will have a fun time.

For example lerp(right, left, right, 0) would no longer return the wanted left but 0 instead.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0