• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

276 Neutral

About nimrodson

  • Rank
  1. FADD vs FMUL time

      FDIV operation still be too slow compared to FADD-FMUL. That means FDIV requires too much transistors to approach to FADD-FMUL times?
  2. FADD vs FMUL time

      Maybe: My interest lies on to know the hardware-algorithmics aspects behind the add and mul operations, regardless if those operations are performed in the FPU or not.
  3. Hi,   I've been some comparisons in C between the 4 basic arithmetic operations (+ , - , * , / ), and surprisingly (for me), add and multiply operations takes the same time: I did the work testes using int and doubles data types and it's the same thing. Analizing the dissamble code generated by gcc (-S parameter) I noted that the opcodes used are fadd and fmul. According wikipedia, x87 FPU in Athlon 64 employs the same time processing both opcodes. I'd like to know what is the reason of this curiosity.   Thanks.    
  4. Traversing a List of Vectors

    If you're using C++11, you can try this too:   #include <vector> #include <list> #include <iostream> int main() {   std::list<std::vector<int>> listVectors{{1,2,3},{4,5,6},{7,8,9}};   for ( auto& vec : listVectors )     for ( int& i : vec ) //process each int i       std::cout << i << std::endl; }
  5. Three of a kind numbers

    Just for fun, a (beginner) Haskell implementation:   unique :: (Eq a) => [a] -> [a] unique [] = [] unique (x:xs) = x : unique (filter (\y -> not (x==y)) xs) nOcurrences :: (Eq a) => a -> [a] -> Int nOcurrences elem list = length (filter (==elem) list) isThreeKind :: (Eq a) => [a] -> Bool isThreeKind list = elem 3 [nOcurrences i list | i <- (unique list)] You could parametrize the 3 number in "isThreeKind" function and have a "fourKind", a "fiveKind", or whatever... Cheers.
  6. Object was not declared in this scope?

    When you doing this:       You're using *automatic* (EDITED, thanks @rip-off. Don't confuse with "auto" C++11 reserved word) declaration -> allocation on the variable "myBullet". That means (among other things) that the "myBullet" timelife remains in the scope in which that variable was declared, in this case, the precedent if statement. When the if statement is consumed, all the *automatic* resources inside the "if" scope are destroyed, including "myBullet". That is the reason why "myBullet.update()" is undefined, because there's no declaration of "myBullet" in the present scope or an outter scope (When you comment out the first line, myBullet declaration, this is in a outter scope, and therefore works).  What you need to do is using dynamic allocation, something like the solutions presented by the others members.
  7.   OK, thanks for the tip. But, what happens in a higher abstraction level? Which elements of functional programming could be beneficious in game design?   Newly, thanks. 
  8. Hi,   I would like to know some opinions about this programming paradigm: It is useful? How much? Could have an important role or participation in game design and/or coding? It is complementary, opposite, or totally uncomparable to OOP?   Thanks. 
  9. So, in conclusion: Game object = (could be?) = entity + sprite.
  10. OK, and who is responsible of listening events? A game object? Or an entity? Thanks
  11.   Great. You're suggesting that a GAME hasn't any reference to render code; instead, it might have a renderer subsystem that cares about it (which could be 2D or 3D, it won't affect the game logic). But then, how can I know how a entity could be rendered (or how can i bind it a sprite ) without have any "graphic" information on it?   Newly thanks to all 
  12.   Yes I'm writing a simple game: on the one hand, I have an entity (i.e. a spaceship) in which I've already coded all it logic (moving forward, backward, rotating to a direction). By the other hand, I have a spaceship sprite which contains a 2D image and a render function. I could have in a Game class a list of sprites where each one of those has a relation with a entity. So, when I want to update the screen, I would do the following:   def updateScreen(game, screen): for sprite in game.sprites: sprite.render(screen) But, what if I wanted to update the game state?   def updateState(game): for sprite in game.sprites: sprite.entity.update() #Something like this could be fine? Or would be better to mantain two lists (sprites, entities) and manage them separatly?   Thanks
  13.   And how can i managed sprites and entities in separated way? I think I need to read some resources about entities, and how interconnect it with sprites.
  14.   So should I mantain these concepts separated? Or for the sake of simplicity, can I manage them together?. I mean if I could "mix" graphics issues with game object logic...