• 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
Happy SDE

Different math types

8 posts in this topic

Hi Forum!

I’ve started to play with NV PhysX, and found a little bit inconvenient working with different math types, that solve the same thing.

Right now, I have:
1. Own float3
2. physx::PxExtendedVec3
3. DirectX::XMFLOAT3

I am thinking on using own float3 that will have constructor and cast operators for ANY other type and on API boundary cast to particular API type.

Are there any better options for dealing with such zoo of types?

Thanks in advance!

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I normally just see the explicit conversion functions. Since they only have to be used on API boundaries it's not as awkward as it might initially seem. And often there are only 1 or 2 'real' representations anyway*, so if your conversions are inlined or templated, they sometimes disappear entirely at compile time.

 

(* e.g. A Vector3 is almost always either 3 contiguous floats, or a __m128 type with 32 bits/the 'w' component disregarded.)

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Thank you all!

Using union is a pretty good solution! :)

struct float3
{
    union
    {
        struct
        {
            float x, y, z;
        };

        float             arr[3];
        DirectX::XMFLOAT3 xmf3;
        physx::PxVec3     pv3;
    };

    float3(float x, float y, float z) : x{ x }, y{ y }, z{ z } {}
    float3(__m128 xyz){ DirectX::XMStoreFloat3(reinterpret_cast<XMFLOAT3*>(this), xyz); }
    
    operator const physx::PxVec3&() const { return pv3; }
};
Edited by Happy SDE
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Thanks for advise!

So, in addition to unit tests, here are some static asserts:

TEST(float3, FieldTests)
{
    const float3 f3{ 1,2,3 };
    
    EXPECT_EQ(f3.x, 1);
    EXPECT_EQ(f3.y, 2);
    EXPECT_EQ(f3.z, 3);

    EXPECT_EQ(f3.arr[0], 1);
    EXPECT_EQ(f3.arr[1], 2);
    EXPECT_EQ(f3.arr[2], 3);

    EXPECT_EQ(f3.xmf3.x, 1);
    EXPECT_EQ(f3.xmf3.y, 2);
    EXPECT_EQ(f3.xmf3.z, 3);

    EXPECT_EQ(f3.pv3.x, 1);
    EXPECT_EQ(f3.pv3.y, 2);
    EXPECT_EQ(f3.pv3.z, 3);
}

static_assert(sizeof(float3) == 12, "Some union type is not plain 3-float");

static_assert(offsetof(float3, x) == offsetof(float3, xmf3.x), "Invalid alignment");
static_assert(offsetof(float3, y) == offsetof(float3, xmf3.y), "Invalid alignment");
static_assert(offsetof(float3, z) == offsetof(float3, xmf3.z), "Invalid alignment");

static_assert(offsetof(float3, x) == offsetof(float3, pv3.x), "Invalid alignment");
static_assert(offsetof(float3, y) == offsetof(float3, pv3.y), "Invalid alignment");
static_assert(offsetof(float3, z) == offsetof(float3, pv3.z), "Invalid alignment");
I wouldn't recommend including the 3rd party types in the union unless you are very sure about their alignment and endianness.

Kylotan, I am not sure why I should care about endianness.

The only time I heard about them is on interview.

If I target only PC (Win x64 only), and probably in a future, XBO/PS4, or next gen+1, why should I care about endianness?

Edited by Happy SDE
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really mean endianness in terms of processor endianness, but in terms of how the values are ordered in memory. Sometimes the 'x' component of a vector uses the most significant bits of the structure, and sometimes it uses the least significant. If you start using unions and reinterpret_cast then you miss this subtlety and can break the values during conversion.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@[member="Happy SDE"], you also want:

static_assert( alignof(physx::PxVec3) == alignof(float), "uh oh" );
static_assert( alignof(DirectX::XMFLOAT3) == alignof(float), "uh oh" );

However, this is still ill advised from a physical architecture point of view (the way that your code is physically laid out in files).

You generally want to contain dependencies as much as possible, keeping the number of dependencies for each individual file as low as absolutely possible. What you're doing here is the opposite of that. You're forcing every bit of code that wants to operate on a float3 type to by physically dependent on DirectXMath library and the PhysX library. The vast majority of your game code should be completely unaware of the existence of these two libraries, which makes this a bad physical architecture.

On small projects, bad physical architecture is tolerable. On larger projects though, its the thing that determines whether you game gets two-minute compile times or two-hour compile times :lol: and also has massive impacts on long-term maintainability.

Officially it is not supported to read data from a different union field than you wrote it, afaik
Yep the language spec forbids this kind of code, as it violates the aliasing rules... however, every compiler that I'm aware of actually has valid implementation defined behaviour for this kind of code, and they actually encourage this as the recommended way of getting around the aliasing rules when you have to (besides using memcpy, which is the language spec's official loophole). Edited by Hodgman
2

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