51–60 of 799 posts
The article title is half-true. It wasn't so much they migrated away from Rust, but that they migrated away from Bevy, which is an alpha quality game engine. I wouldn't have read the article if it'd been labeled that, so kudos to the blog writer, I guess.
The article title is half-true. It wasn't so much they migrated away from Rust, but that they migrated away from Bevy, which is an alpha quality game engine. I wouldn't have read the article if it'd been labeled that, so kudos to the blog writer, I guess.
The problem with Rust is that almost everything is still at an alpha stage. The vast majority of crates are at version 0.x and are eventually abandoned, replaced, or subject to constant breaking changes While the language itself is great and stable, the ecosystem is not, and reverting to more conservative options is often the most reasonable choice, especially for long-term projects.
It’s incredible how many projects and articles have been written around ECS with very little results. Quake 1-3 uses a single array of structs, with sometimes unused properties. Is your game more complex than quake 3? The “ECS” upgrade to that is having an array for each component type but just letting there be gaps: transform[eid].position += … physics[eid].velocity = …
Don’t see any content on that article for some reason (from iPhone)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with Rust is that almost everything is still at an alpha stage. The vast majority of crates are at version 0.x and are eventually abandoned, replaced, or subject to constant breaking changes While the language itself is great and stable, the ecosystem is not, and reverting to more conservative options is often the most reasonable choice, especially for long-term projects.
I have totally disagree here. I don't even look at crate versions but the stuff works, very well. The resulting code is stable, robust and the crates save an inordinate amount of development time. It's like lego for high end, high performance code. With Rust and the crates you can build actual, useful stuff very quickly. Hit a bug in a crate or have missing functionality? contribute. Software is something that is alm…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with Rust is that almost everything is still at an alpha stage. The vast majority of crates are at version 0.x and are eventually abandoned, replaced, or subject to constant breaking changes While the language itself is great and stable, the ecosystem is not, and reverting to more conservative options is often the most reasonable choice, especially for long-term projects.
I really don’t think Rust is a good match for game dev. Both because of the borrow checker which requires a lot of handles instead of pointers and because compile times are just not great. But outside of games the situation looks very different. “Almost everything” is just not at all accurate. There are tons of very stable and productive ecosystems in Rust.
It’s incredible how many projects and articles have been written around ECS with very little results. Quake 1-3 uses a single array of structs, with sometimes unused properties. Is your game more complex than quake 3? The “ECS” upgrade to that is having an array for each component type but just letting there be gaps: transform[eid].position += … physics[eid].velocity = …
Anyone else get an empty page on mobile Firefox when they try to go the article? All that renders for me is a comment entry box. If I go back to news I can see the article list just fine.
I love Rust, but this lines up with my experience roughly. Especially the rapid iteration. Tried things out with Bevy, but I went back to Godot. There are so many QoL things which would make Rust better for gamedev without revamping the language. Just a mode to automatically coerce between numeric types would make Rust so much more ergonomic for gamedev. But that's a really hard sell (and might be harder to implement…
What numeric types typically need conversions?