Infinite size

  • KydonShadow
    September 2014 Member 0 Permalink

    Layering tpt has been suggested before as well. It can kinda be done currently, but not in the sense you're thinking of.

  • tmo97
    September 2014 Banned 0 Permalink
    This post is hidden because the user is banned
  • jacob1
    September 2014 Developer 0 Permalink
    @tmo97 (View Post)
    It's adding the option itself that would cause some lag (maybe a few fps). If I could do that while keeping the game running as smootly as ever I would have :P.
    Edit: well actually the drop in fps would probably be less than it's ever been, since I used the fact that there is a 4 pixel zone around the edges to remove lots of edge checks. But ... meh.

    @KydonShadow (View Post)
    Layers that interact with each other are actually much more feasible than infinite size. It would just be running two simulations at once (with separate data for each), not trying to store infinite stuff inside parts[] or pmap[].
    Edited once by jacob1. Last: September 2014
  • tmo97
    October 2014 Banned 0 Permalink
    This post is hidden because the user is banned
  • FeynmanLogomaker
    October 2014 Member 1 Permalink

    That button means the difference between a static variable and a normal one, and changing that alone could cause some lag.

  • Jimmyfriend
    October 2014 Member 0 Permalink

    @jacob1 (View Post)

     Does this have to do with the maximum size of a type of integers, or the actual engine itself?

  • jacob1
    October 2014 Developer 0 Permalink
    @Jimmyfriend (View Post)
    The engine itself, 612 wide is nowhere near the maximum size of an integer :P, neither is 235008. It's basically what Feynman said, also I don't have enough time to make such a major change even if I wanted to (which I don't).
  • hax4life
    May 2016 Member 1 Permalink

    Well,in my optinion,i prefer more making a bigger grid,like,form 0 y 0 x to 4000y - 5000x in a special mode,so electronics dont need to be THAT small anymore

  • tmo97
    May 2016 Banned 0 Permalink
    This post is hidden because the user is banned
  • jacob2
    May 2016 Member 0 Permalink
    @hax4life (View Post)
    I think 5000x4000 is a little big .-., how many people even have monitors that size.

    @tmo97 (View Post)
    Without an intricate knowledge of how computers work it might not make much sense. The number isn't currently held in memory because it is a constant. It is directly in the code, meaning it doesn't have to lookup what the screen size is. Of course, since xres and yres are used so often, if we did make it a variable it would probably be in the RAM cache most of the time, which can be read quickly.

    A long time ago we checked and it was a few fps drop. These days, the code is much different so the results could be entirely different. Xres/yres aren't used in the particle update loop so often anymore, so any slowdown would be much reduced now. Maybe sometime (no promises) I'll test it using the benchmark code embedded into my mod.
    Edited once by jacob2. Last: May 2016