Search Results

Search found 10285 results on 412 pages for 'cpu architecture'.

Page 80/412 | < Previous Page | 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87  | Next Page >

  • Pure functional programming and game state

    - by Fu86
    Is there a common technique to handle state (in general) in a functional programming language? There are solutions in every (functional) programming language to handle global state, but I want to avoid this as far as I could. All state in a pure functional manner are function parameters. So I need to put the whole game state (a gigantic hashmap with the world, players, positions, score, assets, enemies, ...)) as a parameter to all functions which wants to manipulate the world on a given input or trigger. The function itself picks the relevant information from the gamestate blob, do something with it, manipulate the gamestate and return the gamestate. But this looks like a poor mans solution for the problem. If I put the whole gamestate into all functions, there is no benefit for me in contrast to global variables or the imperative approach. I could put just the relevant information into the functions and return the actions which will be taken for the given input. And one single function apply all the actions to the gamestate. But most functions need a lot of "relevant" information. move() need the object position, the velocity, the map for collision, position of all enemys, current health, ... So this approach does not seem to work either. So my question is how do I handle the massive amount of state in a functional programming language -- especially for game development?

    Read the article

  • How do I keep user input and rendering independent of the implementation environment?

    - by alex
    I'm writing a Tetris clone in JavaScript. I have a fair amount of experience in programming in general, but am rather new to game development. I want to separate the core game code from the code that would tie it to one environment, such as the browser. My quick thoughts led me to having the rendering and input functions external to my main game object. I could pass the current game state to the rendering method, which could render using canvas, elements, text, etc. I could also map input to certain game input events, such as move piece left, rotate piece clockwise, etc. I am having trouble designing how this should be implemented in my object. Should I pass references to functions that the main object will use to render and process user input? For example... var TetrisClone = function(renderer, inputUpdate) { this.renderer = renderer || function() {}; this.inputUpdate = input || function() {}; this.state = {}; }; TetrisClone.prototype = { update: function() { // Get user input via function passed to constructor. var inputEvents = this.inputUpdate(); // Update game state. // Render the current game state via function passed to constructor. this.renderer(this.state); } }; var renderer = function(state) { // Render blocks to browser page. } var inputEvents = {}; var charCodesToEvents = { 37: "move-piece-left" /* ... */ }; document.addEventListener("keypress", function(event) { inputEvents[event.which] = true; }); var inputUpdate = function() { var translatedEvents = [], event, translatedEvent; for (event in inputEvents) { if (inputEvents.hasOwnProperty(event)) { translatedEvent = charCodesToEvents[event]; translatedEvents.push(translatedEvent); } } inputEvents = {}; return translatedEvents; } var game = new TetrisClone(renderer, inputUpdate); Is this a good game design? How would you modify this to suit best practice in regard to making a game as platform/input independent as possible?

    Read the article

  • Why is facebook cache buggy?

    - by IAdapter
    I just started using facebook and I see that many times when I add something to my profile and visit it later its not there. I bet the reason is that the page is cached and not updated very often. Is this on purpose or is it a bug? P.S. For example I added the music I like and later I see that I did not add it, but next day when I visit again its there. I saw it in two web-browsers, so its a facebook bug. Does it has something to do with scalability?

    Read the article

  • When to unload graphics object from main memory?

    - by piotrek
    I writing my resource mangaer, and I consider about how it can work for graphics objects (like textures, meshes). I think about this : I want to load texture (in pseudocode): Texture t = resMgr.GetTex("image.png"); and GetTex make something like this: load texture from disk to main memory create texture object (load it to gpu memory) unload texture from main memory I consider about 3 step, does game engines that you know unload meshes/textures after load them into gpu memory ?

    Read the article

  • Layers - Logical seperation vs physical

    - by P.Brian.Mackey
    Some programmers recommend logical seperation of layers over physical. For example, given a DL, this means we create a DL namespace not a DL assembly. Benefits include: faster compilation time simpler deployment Faster startup time for your program Less assemblies to reference Im on a small team of 5 devs. We have over 50 assemblies to maintain. IMO this ratio is far from ideal. I prefer an extreme programming approach. Where if 100 assemblies are easier to maintain than 10,000...then 1 assembly must be easier than 100. Given technical limits, we should strive for < 5 assemblies. New assemblies are created out of technical need not layer requirements. Developers are worried for a few reasons. A. People like to work in their own environment so they dont step on eachothers toes. B. Microsoft tends to create new assemblies. E.G. Asp.net has its own DLL, so does winforms. Etc. C. Devs view this drive for a common assembly as a threat. Some team members Have a tendency to change the common layer without regard for how it will impact dependencies. My personal view: I view A. as silos, aka cowboy programming and suggest we implement branching to create isolation. C. First, that is a human problem and we shouldnt create technical work arounds for human behavior. Second, my goal is not to put everything in common. Rather, I want partitions to be made in namespaces not assemblies. Having a shared assembly doesnt make everything common. I want the community to chime in and tell me if Ive gone off my rocker. Is a drive for a single assembly or my viewpoint illogical or otherwise a bad idea?

    Read the article

  • What do you do when the code isn't complicated enough?

    - by Chris
    After six months of development on a project, our stakeholders have had a "gut check" and have decided that the path that we've been walking (a custom designed application framework and data access layer) is holding us (the developers) back from quickly developing the features they would like to see. After several days of debate management and the development team have decided to scrap the current incarnation and start over using ASP.net MVC, with Entity Framework as the bases of the a 'quick and dirty', lets just get it done project. In days following, our senior developer who has never worked with MVC or Entity Framework has finally gotten into a sample project and done some work. His take on ASP.net MVC, "this is not software engineering". So my question is this; what do you do, when one doesn't think the code is complicated enough?

    Read the article

  • Question on methods in Object Oriented Programming

    - by mal
    I’m learning Java at the minute (first language), and as a project I’m looking at developing a simple puzzle game. My question relates to the methods within a class. I have my Block type class; it has its many attributes, set methods, get methods and just plain methods. There are quite a few. Then I have my main board class. At the moment it does most of the logic, positioning of sprites collision detection and then draws the sprites etc... As I am learning to program as much as I’m learning to program games I’m curious to know how much code is typically acceptable within a given method. Is there such thing as having too many methods? All my draw functionality happens in one method, should I break this into a few ‘sub’ methods? My thinking is if I find at a later stage that the for loop I’m using to cycle through the array of sprites searching for collisions in the spriteCollision() method is inefficient I code a new method and just replace the old method calls with the new one, leaving the old code intact. Is it bad practice to have a method that contains one if statement, and place the call for that method in the for loop? I’m very much in the early stages of coding/designing and I need all the help I can get! I find it a little intimidating when people are talking about throwing together a prototype in a day too! Can’t wait until I’m that good!

    Read the article

  • If I am developing a hosted payments page, what should the infrastructure look like?

    - by marcamillion
    If I am not storing credit card info, do I have to be concerned with PCI-compliance? I will be using a payment processor with a bank in my country. Literally just taking the credit card info and passing it to the gateway and processor. I would love to get an idea of the various technologies I might need to consider from an software architectural point of view. What are the best practices in terms of accepting credit cards and reducing fraud risk on my end? I will be creating the app in Rails.

    Read the article

  • Motivation for service layer (instead of just copying dlls)?

    - by BornToCode
    I'm creating an application which has 2 different UIs so I'm making it with a service layer which I understood is appropriate for such case. However I found myself just creating web methods for every single method I have in the BL layer, so the services basically built from methods that looks like this: return customers_bl.Get_Customer_Prices(customer_id); I understood that a main point of the service layer is to prevent duplication of code so I asked myself - well, why not just import the BL.dll (and the DAL.dll) to the other UI, and whenever making a change re-copy the dll files, it might not be so 'neat', but is the all purpose of the service layer to prevent this? {I know something is wrong in my approach, I'm probably missing the importance of service layer, I'd like to get more motivation to create another layer, especially because as it is I found that many of my BL functions ALREADY looks like: return customers_dal.Get_Customer_Prices(cust_id) which led me to ask: was it really necessary to create the BL just because on several functions I actually have LOGIC inside the BL?} so I'm looking for more motivation to creating ONE MORE layer, I'm sure it's not just to make it more convenient that I won't have to re-copy the dlls on changes? Am I grasping it wrong? Any simple guidelines on how to design service layer (corresponding to all the BL layer functions or not? any simple example?) any enlightenment on the subject?

    Read the article

  • Game State / Screen Management

    - by Ashylnn Mac
    What's the best way to handle game states / screens? My problem is this: PlayGameScreen adds a new InventoryGameScreen to the game during it's update. This immediately adds InventoryGameScreen to the array of GameScreens. That's throwing an exception when iterating over the array that the contents of the array have changed. Should I have two more arrays, like screensToBeAdded and screensToBeRemoved and do all the processing for them at the end of the game loop after drawing all the other screens?

    Read the article

  • How to implement a component based system for items in a web game.

    - by Landstander
    Reading several other questions and answers on using a component based system to define items I want to use one for the items and spells in a web game written in PHP. I'm just stuck on the implementation. I'm going to use a DB schema suggested in this series (part 5 describes the schema); http://t-machine.org/index.php/2007/09/03/entity-systems-are-the-future-of-mmog-development-part-1/ This means I'll have an items table with generic item properties, a table listing all of the components for an item and finally records in each component table used to make up the item. Assuming I can select the first two together in a single query, I'm still going to do N queries for each component type. I'm kind of fine with this because I can cache the data into memcache and check there first before doing any queries. I'll need to build up the items on every request they are used in so the implementation needs to be on the lean side even if they're pulled from memcache. But right there is where I feel confident about implementing a component system for my items ends. I figure I'd need to bring attributes and behaviors into the container from each component it uses. I'm just not sure how to do that effectively and not end up writing a lot of specialized code to deal with each component. For example an AttackComponent might need to know how to filter targets inside of a battle context and also maybe provide an attack behavior. That same item might also have a UsableComponent which allows the item to be used and apply some effect onto a different set of targets filtered differently from the same battle context. Then not every part of an item is an active part, an AttributeBonusComponent might need to only kick in when the item is in an equipped state or when displaying the item details page. Ultimately, how should I bring all of the components together into the container so when I use an item as a weapon I get the correct list of targets? Know when a weapon can also be used as an item? Or to apply the bonuses the item provides to a character object? I feel like I've gone too far down the rabbit hole and I can't grasp onto the simple solution in front of me. (If that makes any sense at all.) Likewise if I were to implement the best answer from here I feel like I'd have a lot of the same questions. How to model multiple "uses" (e.g. weapon) for usable-inventory/object/items (e.g. katana) within a relational database.

    Read the article

  • Inventory Consignment Flow

    - by ipohfly
    Not sure whether this is the right place to ask this question, but here goes.. Currently I have requirement to add support for consignment transaction in our inventory module. I have a very limited understanding of what consignment means in inventory, i.e. Customer get stocks/products from Seller without actually buying them, the product just resides in the Customer's inventory and it's still owned by the Seller. Only when the Customer actually buy the stocks then only will the ownership of the stock is transferred. The issue is i can't imagine how the data will be presented to both the Customer and the Seller. What i know is that i would need to deduct the stock from the Seller's inventory when the Customer raise a request to get the stock through consignment, but what about the 'ownership' of the stocks/products? Does that mean i would need to create another column in my table to state that for each inventory it is owned by who? Anywhere i can get information on how i should work out an inventory module like this? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Motivation for a service layer (instead of just copying dlls)?

    - by BornToCode
    I'm creating an application which has 2 different UIs so I'm making it with a service layer which I understood is appropriate for such scenario. However I found myself just creating web methods for every single method I have in the BL layer, so the services basically built from methods that looks like this: return customers_bl.Get_Customer_Prices(customer_id); I understood that a main point of the service layer is to prevent duplication of code so I asked myself - why not just import the BL.DLL (and the dal.dll) to the other UI, and whenever making a change re-copy the dlls, it might not be so 'neat', but still less hassle than one more layer? {I know something is wrong in my approach, I'm probably missing the importance of service layer, I'd like to get more motivation to create another layer, especially because as it is I found that many of my BL functions ALREADY looks like: return customers_dal.Get_Customer_Prices(cust_id) which led me to ask: was it really necessary to create the BL just because on several functions I actually have LOGIC inside the BL?} so I'm looking for more motivation to creating ONE MORE layer, I'm sure it's not just to make it more convenient that I won't have to re-copy the dlls on changes? Am I grasping it wrong? Any simple guidelines on how to design service layer (corresponding to all the BL layer functions or not? any simple example?) any enlightenment on the subject?

    Read the article

  • Two components offering the same functionality, required by different dependencies

    - by kander
    I'm building an application in PHP, using Zend Framework 1 and Doctrine2 as the ORM layer. All is going well. Now, I happened to notice that both ZF1 and Doctrine2 come with, and rely on, their own caching implementation. I've evaluated both, and while each has its own pro's and cons, neither of them stand out as superior to the other for my simple needs. Both libraries also seem to be written against their respective interfaces, not their implementations. Reasons why I feel this is an issue is that during the bootstrapping of my application, I have to configure two caching drivers - each with its own syntax. A mismatch is easily created this way, and it feels inefficient to set up two connections to the caching backend because of this. I'm trying to determine what the best way forward is, and would welcome any insights you may be able to offer. What I've thought up so far are four options: Do nothing, accept that two classes offering caching functionality are present. Create a Facade class to stick Zend's interface onto Doctrine's caching implementation. Option 2, the other way around - create a Facade to map Doctrine's interface on a Zend Framework backend. Use multiple-interface-inheritance to create one interface to rule them all, and pray that there aren't any overlaps (ie: if both have a "save" method, they'll need to accept params in the same order due to PHP's lack of proper polymorphism). What option is best, or is there a "None of the above" variant that I'm not aware of?

    Read the article

  • How should game objects be aware of each other?

    - by Jefffrey
    I find it hard to find a way to organize game objects so that they are polymorphic but at the same time not polymorphic. Here's an example: assuming that we want all our objects to update() and draw(). In order to do that we need to define a base class GameObject which have those two virtual pure methods and let polymorphism kicks in: class World { private: std::vector<GameObject*> objects; public: // ... update() { for (auto& o : objects) o->update(); for (auto& o : objects) o->draw(window); } }; The update method is supposed to take care of whatever state the specific class object needs to update. The fact is that each objects needs to know about the world around them. For example: A mine needs to know if someone is colliding with it A soldier should know if another team's soldier is in proximity A zombie should know where the closest brain, within a radius, is For passive interactions (like the first one) I was thinking that the collision detection could delegate what to do in specific cases of collisions to the object itself with a on_collide(GameObject*). Most of the the other informations (like the other two examples) could just be queried by the game world passed to the update method. Now the world does not distinguish objects based on their type (it stores all object in a single polymorphic container), so what in fact it will return with an ideal world.entities_in(center, radius) is a container of GameObject*. But of course the soldier does not want to attack other soldiers from his team and a zombie doesn't case about other zombies. So we need to distinguish the behavior. A solution could be the following: void TeamASoldier::update(const World& world) { auto list = world.entities_in(position, eye_sight); for (const auto& e : list) if (auto enemy = dynamic_cast<TeamBSoldier*>(e)) // shoot towards enemy } void Zombie::update(const World& world) { auto list = world.entities_in(position, eye_sight); for (const auto& e : list) if (auto enemy = dynamic_cast<Human*>(e)) // go and eat brain } but of course the number of dynamic_cast<> per frame could be horribly high, and we all know how slow dynamic_cast can be. The same problem also applies to the on_collide(GameObject*) delegate that we discussed earlier. So what it the ideal way to organize the code so that objects can be aware of other objects and be able to ignore them or take actions based on their type?

    Read the article

  • Getting into the details of game engine programming

    - by Darkslash
    I am interested in learning game programming, but I really have an interest in the lower level engineering in games. I have OpenGL experience, and I am really interested in learning more about implementing AI, Physics, etc. I have a computer science degree, so I really like getting into technical stuff. Many times when I ask about this sort of thing, I get a lot of "Use an engine", "Use Unity3d", "Why waste your time writing code that already exists", etc, etc. My idea was to use simpler libraries such as SFML or XNA so that I could learn how to implement the more complex systems. The thing is, although I do want to write games, I want to learn things that using something like Unity simply doesn't teach you. My goal is not to make a current generation quality 3D game to sell, I just want to make some cool smaller games and learn all I can about the programming side of game development. Is this something that people just do not do anymore? It seems like everywhere I turn people are using Unity or UDK or GameMaker. I fully understand why you would use a tool like these, but I cant see how they would suit my purposes. So where does someone like myself turn? Am I trying to learn something that people just do not bother doing anymore? Is the innovation in this area gone and just all about gameplay now? I'm sorry if this question seems silly, but I am genuinely interested in knowing more about this and meeting more people who are interested in this sort of thing.

    Read the article

  • Stop myself from over-complicating applications

    - by stuartmclark
    Recently I worked on a fairly large project involving C# and MVVM. This application had around 160 projects in the solutions each seprarated into their own layers. As I have been working on this application for almost a year, building it from scratch as part of a team, I am now coming off that project and onto smaller more trivial projects. As I was beginning to develop a small in-house tool I found myself trying to mimic the larger applications structure and layering but in the end I just had a simple application with several DLLs which I know I wouldn't have done if I had not worked on that larger application before. I am just wondering if there are any techniques I can utilise to stop myself from turning a "code-behind" style trivial application into a full blown MVVM application? Or should I continue developing as I am and try to keep the unnecessary fluff out of the project?

    Read the article

  • Question about modeling with MVC (the pattern, not the MS stuff / non web)

    - by paul
    I'm working on an application in which I'm looking to employ the MVC pattern, but I've come up against a design decision point I could use some help with. My application is going to deal with the design of state-machines. Currently the MVC model holds information about the machine's states, inputs, outputs, etc. The view is going to show a diagram for the machine, graphically allowing the user to add new states, establish transitions, and put the states in a pleasing arrangement, among other things. I would like to store part of the diagram's state (e.g. the x and y state positions) when the machine information is stored for later retrieval, and am wondering how best to go about structuring the model(s?) for this. It seems like this UI information is more closely related to the view than to the state-machine model, so I was thinking that a secondary model might be in order, but I am reluctant to pursue this route because of the added complexity. Adding this information to the current model doesn't seem the right way to go about it either. This is the my first time using the MVC pattern so I'm still figuring things out. Any input would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Learning how to design knowledge and data flow [closed]

    - by max
    In designing software, I spend a lot of time deciding how the knowledge (algorithms / business logic) and data should be allocated between different entities; that is, which object should know what. I am asking for advice about books, articles, presentations, classes, or other resources that would help me learn how to do it better. I code primarily in Python, but my question is not really language-specific; even if some of the insights I learn don't work in Python, that's fine. I'll give a couple examples to clarify what I mean. Example 1 I want to perform some computation. As a user, I will need to provide parameters to do the computation. I can have all those parameters sent to the "main" object, which then uses them to create other objects as needed. Or I can create one "main" object, as well as several additional objects; the additional objects would then be sent to the "main" object as parameters. What factors should I consider to make this choice? Example 2 Let's say I have a few objects of type A that can perform a certain computation. The main computation often involves using an object of type B that performs some interim computation. I can either "teach" A instances what exact parameters to pass to B instances (i.e., make B "dumb"); or I can "teach" B instances to figure out what needs to be done when looking at an A instance (i.e., make B "smart"). What should I think about when I'm making this choice?

    Read the article

  • Is there such thing like a "refactoring/maintainability group" role in software companies?

    - by dukeofgaming
    So, I work in a company that does embedded software development, other groups focus in the core development of different products' software and my department (which is in another geographical location) which is located at the factory has to deal with software development as well, but across all products, so that we can also fix things quicker when the lines go down due to software problems with the product. In other words, we are generalists while other groups specialize on each product. Thing is, it is kind of hard to get involved in core development when you are distributed geographically (well, I know it really isn't that hard, but there might be unintended cultural/political barriers when it comes to the discipline of collaborating remotely). So I figured that, since we are currently just putting fires out and somewhat being idle/sub-utilized (even though we are a new department, or maybe that is the reason), I thought that a good role for us could be detecting areas of opportunity of refactoring and rearchitecting code and all other implementations that might have to do with stewarding maintainability and modularity. Other groups aren't focused on this because they don't have the time and they have aggressive deadlines, which damage the quality of the code (eternal story of software projects) The thing is that I want my group/department to be recognized by management and other groups with this role officially, and I'm having trouble to come up with a good definition/identity of our group for this matter. So my question is: is this role something that already exists?, or am I the first one to make something like this up?

    Read the article

  • What's the right/standard way of achieving separation of concerns?

    - by Ghanima
    Some background: I want to start developing games, and taking some of the advice given in this site, I've started with something simple and familiar, such as pong, tetris, etc. I want to take as much time as needed to make sure that I have the basics right before moving on to something bigger. I have medium programming experience but I realize making games is a different thing. I find myself wondering many things like should this be in a separate class? Should this module handle this stuff or is it better to let other modules have that kind of functionality? For example, the bouncing of a ball in pong, right now is handled in the ball module, but maybe it's better that some other module did it. Right now I have different modules: one for the graphics, one for the game logic, and others for the objects (depending on the kind of movement required, not all the objects are alike). I know I am asking a lot, any tips you have will be very much appreciated. Short question: What's the right or standard way of separating the modules? What have you found most effective? Is it enough to just keep the drawing (graphics) and the logic separate? Is it necessary to have a lot of classes? (for example for the objects in the game, to handle the movement, etc)

    Read the article

  • How to setup users for desktop app with SQL Azure as backend?

    - by Manuel
    I'm considering SQL Azure as DB for a new application I'm developing. The reason I want to go with Azure is because I don't want to have to maintain yet another database(s) and I want my users to be able to access the data from anywhere. The problem is that I'm not clear regarding how to users will connect. The application is a basic CRUD type of windows app. I've read that you need to add your IP to SQL Azure's firewall to connect to it, but I don't know if it's only for administration purposes only. Can anyone clarify if anyone (anywhere) can access the data with the proper credentials? Which of the following scenarios would work best (if at all)? A) Add each user to SQL Azure and have the app connect directly to Azure as if it was connecting to SQL Server B) Add an anonymous user SQL Azure and pass the real user's password/hash with every call so the Azure database can service the requests accordingly. C) Put a WCF service in between so that it handles the authentication stuff. The service will only serve the appropriate information to the user given his/her authentication and SQL Azure would be open to the service exclusively. D) - ideas are welcomed - This is confusing because all Azure examples I see are for websites. I have a hard time believing SQL Azure wouldn't handle the case of desktop apps connecting to it. So what's the best practice?

    Read the article

  • Where can I find good (well organized) examples of game code?

    - by smasher
    Where can I find good (well organized) examples of game code? I'm hoping that I can pick up some organizational tips. Most examples in books are too short and leave out lots of detail for the sake of brevity. I'm particularly interested on how to group your variables and methods so that another programmer would know where to look in the code. For example initializers at the top, then methods that take input, then methods that update views. I don't care about a particular language, as long as its OOP. I looked at the Quake 2 and 3 sources, but they're straight C and not much help for getting tips on organizing your objects. So, have you seen some good source? Any pointers to code that makes you say "wow, that's well organized" would be great.

    Read the article

  • C++ Game Engine Book/Tutorial/Anything recent?

    - by TheNoob
    Before I get flamed, please understand that I have been looking for a while now. Yes, I have found a good amount of game engine tutorials...except filled with errors, out of date syntax, missing crucial information, and so on. Is there anywhere with a recent tutorial, or a book, anything at all? I'm not asking for an opinion in graphics API's, just a point in the right direction to get started on game engine development. I just want to make it clear, I have googled/stacked like crazy. Any help appreciated. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Without using a pre-built physics engine, how can I implement 3-D collision detection from scratch?

    - by Andy Harglesis
    I want to tackle some basic 3-D collision detection and was wondering how engines handle this and give you a pretty interface and make it so easy ... I want to do it all myself, however. 2-D collision detection is extremely simple and can be done multiple ways that even beginner programmers could think up: 1.When the pixels touch; 2.when a rectangle range is exceeded; 3.when a pixel object is detected near another one in a pixel-based rendering engine. But 3-D is different with one dimension, but complex in many more so ... what are the general, basic understanding/examples on how 3-D collision detection can be implemented? Think two shaded, OpenGL cubes that are moved next to each other with a simple OpenGL rendering context and keyboard events.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87  | Next Page >