5 ms·
...which is NOT high on the list of concerns for a game title, what you want instead is massive performance gains, so you can do more with less, and in the end
by ConcernedCoder 6y ago
...which is NOT high on the list of concerns for a game title, what you want instead is massive performance gains, so you can do more with less, and in the end produce a better experience than your competitor. -- function calls/indirection/making your code 'easy' to understand, all have a RUNTIME cost, and many small costs add up to a large cost, the reasoning is really that simple.
- pm90 6y agoI struggle to see how composing into functions adds a runtime cost when using modern compilers; as others have pointed out the compiler will inline it if the function is only used once. This rationalization doesn’t make sense to me, especially for game engines which I assume are not limited to a release or 2 but are used to power multiple titles. If the software artifact is going to live for a long time, it’s probably worth the effort to make it easier to understand and test.
- winrid 6y agoThis! I'm not sure why we are discussing the runtime cost of a function with modern compilers. Could this pattern result in code so slow the game won't work in development w/o high optimization flags, thus increasing compile time?
- cheerlessbog 6y ago> the compiler will inline it if the function is only used once. There may be other criteria, eg is the function likely to be called.