Live data from Hacker News

Could ImGUI Be the Future of GUIs?

games.greggman.com

31–40 of 128 posts

Re: Could ImGUI Be the Future of GUIs?

#31
Anyone experienced with ImGUI ever use Rebol and Red's DRAW DSL?

I believe Rebol's GUI support is even easier to use than ImGUI, but of course it can't be embedded and used in the same way as ImGUI either. I wonder if non Red projects could possibly hook into Red's system once Red/System gets closer to C level performance?

Re: Could ImGUI Be the Future of GUIs?

#32
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've written real-time game UIs before so I think I have some relevant experience here. 1. It is very possible to write a retained-mode GUI in a graphics API like DirectX or OpenGL. In fact, a retained GUI would typically wipe immediate GUIs in terms of performance in this context. In immediate mode, the GUI's vertex buffers need to be completely reconstructed from scratch every single frame, which is slow , CPU boun…

I didn't say that it's not possible to solve these problems in a retained GUI, just that existing ones, QT, Win32, WPF have these problems. And since writing a full retained GUI is not exactly trivial, people just wrote mini-GUIs using immediate mode. When I talked about retained mode APIs, I was thinking about scene graphs, where you say "addMesh" or "addSphere" and then just call "renderFrame". I'm aware that most…

Sorry if I misinterpreted your post but I don't think that changes my response much.

You can absolutely use Win32 Forms and WPF (and probably Qt) with a game. They can be overlaid on top of a DirectX or OpenGL window (with a transparent background) -- I've done it before! I don't think it would have any of the downsides you mentioned, either, except that it wouldn't be GPU accelerated or actually rendered inside the graphics context, which is why nobody actually does this in practice.

But that ignores the dozens of GUI middleware specifically designed for games. A cursory Google search reveals that most of these are going to be retained mode. There's a reason for that. Projects like ImGUI appeal to mostly indie devs who don't have the time or resources to write their own GUI library or license some third-party middleware. And it's probably going to be just fine for their use case. But it's definitely not a perfect solution and we definitely shouldn't throw away decades worth of knowledge and experience like the article is implying.

Re: Could ImGUI Be the Future of GUIs?

#33
post #6

It's important to point out why games use immediate mode GUIs: 1. The GUI needs to be overlaid on the game image (OpenGL/DirectX). This is difficult with traditional GUIs like QT. 2. The GUI needs to be updated in sync with the game, again, it's difficult to integrate traditional GUIs event loops into the game loop, especially with stuff like double/triple buffering. 3. The GUI needs to be as fast as possible, games…

I've written real-time game UIs before so I think I have some relevant experience here. 1. It is very possible to write a retained-mode GUI in a graphics API like DirectX or OpenGL. In fact, a retained GUI would typically wipe immediate GUIs in terms of performance in this context. In immediate mode, the GUI's vertex buffers need to be completely reconstructed from scratch every single frame, which is slow , CPU boun…

I've written real-time game UIs too. I think you underestimate just how ludicrously fast CPUs and GPUs are, and overestimate the complexity of your average GUI. What does your average screen's-worth of GUI consist of, after all? How many widgets are there? I double dare you to tell me that a modern computer or games console can't handle 500 widgets per frame. And I now triple dare you to tell me that your UI designer has put that many damn widgets on one stupid screen in the first place.

(Every UI I worked on actually did redraw everything every frame anyway. It's really not a big deal. Your average GPU can draw a monstrous amount of stuff, something quite ridiculous, and any sensible game UI that's actually usable will struggle to get anywhere near that limit.)

Re: Could ImGUI Be the Future of GUIs?

#34
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't say that it's not possible to solve these problems in a retained GUI, just that existing ones, QT, Win32, WPF have these problems. And since writing a full retained GUI is not exactly trivial, people just wrote mini-GUIs using immediate mode. When I talked about retained mode APIs, I was thinking about scene graphs, where you say "addMesh" or "addSphere" and then just call "renderFrame". I'm aware that most…

Sorry if I misinterpreted your post but I don't think that changes my response much. You can absolutely use Win32 Forms and WPF (and probably Qt) with a game. They can be overlaid on top of a DirectX or OpenGL window (with a transparent background) -- I've done it before! I don't think it would have any of the downsides you mentioned, either, except that it wouldn't be GPU accelerated or actually rendered inside the…

Qt's QML uses OpenGL and can at least render into an FBO in your existing OpenGL context more or less out of the box. Integrating it with a game render loop deeper should be possible too, but more effort.

Re: Could ImGUI Be the Future of GUIs?

#36
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've written real-time game UIs before so I think I have some relevant experience here. 1. It is very possible to write a retained-mode GUI in a graphics API like DirectX or OpenGL. In fact, a retained GUI would typically wipe immediate GUIs in terms of performance in this context. In immediate mode, the GUI's vertex buffers need to be completely reconstructed from scratch every single frame, which is slow , CPU boun…

I've written real-time game UIs too. I think you underestimate just how ludicrously fast CPUs and GPUs are, and overestimate the complexity of your average GUI. What does your average screen's-worth of GUI consist of, after all? How many widgets are there? I double dare you to tell me that a modern computer or games console can't handle 500 widgets per frame. And I now triple dare you to tell me that your UI designer…

I'm sure many games can get away very well with an immediate mode GUI. I think the question is not can you, but rather should you. My last project used a custom immediate-mode GUI. At the absolute pinnacle of optimization, it was pushing 2,000+ FPS on my machine with something like 3-4k vertices, with heavy texture mapping and anti-aliasing. But the problem was that even with peak optimization, the CPU was spending 15-20% of its time every frame recreating the UI's vertex buffer. Now imagine if we had done a retained-mode GUI instead. That 15-20% overhead would be reduced to near 0% on a typical frame. For nearly any type of game, that kind of savings is really significant. Think of how many more vertices your artists can add, or cool gameplay elements you can add that you didn't have the CPU time available before, and how much better it will run on lower-end hardware.

Why settle for "good-enough" performance?

Re: Could ImGUI Be the Future of GUIs?

#37

Really probably not. I love them and they're very handy in certain situations (debugging tools, quick UIs) but once you need a lot of customization they become extremely cumbersome. Also really kind of makes it impossible for designers or less technical people to do anything. Also, while I think separating view logic is slightly overrated, it is useful, and it's very hard to do that with IMGUI. Also it doesn't thread…

On the allocation point, the efficient way to handle this is to use a per-frame memory pool. Because nothing in the IMGUI can persist between frames, you can allocate a single arena of memory for any UI elements that need to store bounding boxes or callbacks or whatever. Each frame just reset your next_ptr to the start of the arena. Technically you are allocating memory, but in practice your allocations are free.

Re: Could ImGUI Be the Future of GUIs?

#38
Probably not. With technologies like React that make retained-mode UIs look more like immediate-mode ones, there is less need for full blown immediate-mode UIs. React achieves the programmability of an immediate-mode UI without sacrificing the performance of a retained-mode UI (at least, that’s the goal).

Re: Could ImGUI Be the Future of GUIs?

#39
post #6

It's important to point out why games use immediate mode GUIs: 1. The GUI needs to be overlaid on the game image (OpenGL/DirectX). This is difficult with traditional GUIs like QT. 2. The GUI needs to be updated in sync with the game, again, it's difficult to integrate traditional GUIs event loops into the game loop, especially with stuff like double/triple buffering. 3. The GUI needs to be as fast as possible, games…

I think 1, 2 and maybe 3 could all be done with a traditional retained mode GUI, and indeed there are retained mode GUI systems for games. The big traditional UI frameworks just have not been made to work well with games. Which is fair, game engines are alien environments that may as well be considered their own platforms. > It's worth pointing out that the immediate/retained split doesn't apply only to the GUI Indee…

Generic retained mode is dead, but creating a scene graph driven by something other than imperative updates (eg constraint satisfaction via a physics engine) is alive and well. The problem is that you can’t overlay the former very well in the latter, so things like OGL retained mode are never used anymore.

Re: Could ImGUI Be the Future of GUIs?

#40
Say I want to make a program, X, that draws a 50x50px square over another program, Y, at (200,100) and only program Y. Do i need a low level stuff for this, can imGUI be used here? or is it possible with electronjs etc... Also, would program Y be able to detect, with administrator privileges that another program was targeting its pixel space and drawing over it?
Post reply on HN