Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: If C++ is so bad, what should game developers use?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–127 of 127 posts

Re: Ask HN: If C++ is so bad, what should game developers use?

#121

Post by pmjordan »

huhtenberg wrote: post #100
pmjordan wrote: post #43

I've been contemplating this, too. C++ was my main language for a long time (~1999-2007) and about 30% of my consulting work is still in C++ (game development). I've found that while C++ code can be very clean and concise, it usually requires a lot of behind the scenes scaffolding, and it's very easy to get wrong even if you know the damn thing inside out. Programming in more expressive languages has certainly improv…

Same here, except that after using C and C++ for over a decade I find switching to another language quite trying. The habit of constantly thinking what machine code is generated from the higher language constructs is really hard to ignore. Moreover, I actually like C. But it is inconvenient. On the other hand C++ is convenient, but I don't like it. So I started playing with developing a dialect of C that adds support…

I had the problem of worrying about low-level nuts and bolts for a while too; I guess it must have been the jarring difference in expressiveness between C++ and Lisp that made me stop worrying in the end. I don't think you can realistically wean yourself from C++'s mind pollution gradually - you have to go cold turkey and go with a high level language, dynamic typing, garbage collection, not especially object oriented, etc. Do a couple of smaller projects with a language like that and you'll probably find that you don't really want that "better C++" of yours after all.

Re: Ask HN: If C++ is so bad, what should game developers use?

#122

Post by thras »

loup-vaillant wrote: post #120
thras wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but people use the term this way: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&...

A quick read of this page and its top link strongly suggest that runtime type inference is an optimization designed to speed up the interpretation of dynamically typed programs. It sounds very useful for JIT compilation (to make appropriate code specializations). It's also likely too complex to be implemented in simple interpreters (like Lua's). Note that this term isn't very widely used: we are already in second pos…

Type checking is what you say when the compiler makes sure that you've used all your types correctly, and spits out an error when you don't. It's there to prevent you from trying to assign an int to a string, for example.

"Runtime type checking" is the same thing at runtime. Errors and exceptions get thrown, your program stops. So no, that's not what we're talking about.

Here is a description of type checking: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_system#Type_checking

Re: Ask HN: If C++ is so bad, what should game developers use?

#123

Post by aceofspades19 »

lincolnq wrote: post #107
aceofspades19 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was mostly referring to the language. The standard library that comes with Java is over-engineered to the point of absurdity

Not _quite_ to the point of absurdity. I kinda like it. Admittedly, I dislike it when I have to instantiate four classes to read the contents of a file. But I have also used the same flexibility to great advantage, and been burned in other languages when the standard library wasn't flexible enough.

What languages are these? because I have never used a language where the standard library was not flexible enough.

Re: Ask HN: If C++ is so bad, what should game developers use?

#124

Post by mark_l_watson »

I used C++ when I worked on game AI and a few Nintendo U64 games, also for some virtual reality stuff for Disney and SAIC. Right choice for the games, in retrospect probably not for VR.

C++ is fine when you need high performance and can live with more expensive development.

Re: Ask HN: If C++ is so bad, what should game developers use?

#125

Post by huhtenberg »

pmjordan wrote: post #121
huhtenberg wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here, except that after using C and C++ for over a decade I find switching to another language quite trying. The habit of constantly thinking what machine code is generated from the higher language constructs is really hard to ignore. Moreover, I actually like C. But it is inconvenient. On the other hand C++ is convenient, but I don't like it. So I started playing with developing a dialect of C that adds support…

I had the problem of worrying about low-level nuts and bolts for a while too; I guess it must have been the jarring difference in expressiveness between C++ and Lisp that made me stop worrying in the end. I don't think you can realistically wean yourself from C++'s mind pollution gradually - you have to go cold turkey and go with a high level language, dynamic typing, garbage collection, not especially object oriente…

> you don't really want that "better C++" of yours after all

I want it because it is an interesting project in itself. But I hear what you are saying.

Re: Ask HN: If C++ is so bad, what should game developers use?

#126

Post by zentux »

miloshh wrote: post #26

You're right, C++ pretty much has no serious alternatives for games. And not just games, anything that involves computer graphics, physical simulation, computer vision or image processing. Python is excellent if some good soul has already written a library that does exactly what you need (in C or C++, obviously). The combination of numpy+PyOpenGL+PyCUDA is great for certain kinds of research projects (I have written…

I absolutely agree !! I hate C++ too, but as you said , there is no real alternative for it. Mixing C and python is a good idea ,but real world applications in my area (computer vision) use C++ widely ...

Re: Ask HN: If C++ is so bad, what should game developers use?

#127

Post by imok20 »

zokier wrote: post #97
imok20 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last you heard must have been a while ago. Even the engines aren't being written in assembly. Writing in x86 yields slower and less optimized code than letting gcc -o3 etc compile your C code in x86. It simply gets too complex to manage in assembly.

offtopic: gcc -Os is probably even faster than -O3.

That's not true in the case of C – just reported in the case of Ruby. And only in some cases.
Post reply on HN