Sounds like you're having a classic voxel engine dilemma! From your description, it looks like the local chunk coordinates are effectively being rendered in a 0 to 15 range, which means you have 16 valid slots for blocks in both the x and z directions. This range includes the edges of the chunk—specRead more
Sounds like you’re having a classic voxel engine dilemma! From your description, it looks like the local chunk coordinates are effectively being rendered in a 0 to 15 range, which means you have 16 valid slots for blocks in both the x and z directions. This range includes the edges of the chunk—specifically, positions 0 and 15.
Since you’re using 17 x 100 x 17 for the chunk size, the extra padding around the edges is typically meant for handling neighboring chunks without causing out-of-bounds errors. So, you should definitely be using the full range from 0 to 15 for your local coordinates.
If the blocks you want to access are actually meant to be from indices 1 to 15 for some reason, then this could lead to out-of-bounds access for coordinates (0, y, 0) or (15, y, 15). Given your current logic that calculates local coordinates, it’s actually optimal to treat the coordinate space as 0 to 15.
So here’s what you can do:
Keep your current conversion logic as is. It correctly maps world coordinates to local chunk coordinates.
When accessing your block data, just ensure you check bounds. For x and z, you can directly access local_coord.x and local_coord.z since they will range from 0 to 15.
To sum it up, maintain the range of 0 to 15 for accessing your blocks. You’re doing great for a rookie, and it’s totally normal to get tangled in these concepts. Just take it one step at a time!
Hey, interesting problem! I ran into something similar recently, and yeah, at first I also thought about brute forcing it—like checking every possible subarray. But the thing is, you'd end up having to calculate averages for a LOT of combinations, especially if your array gets big. So, probably therRead more
Hey, interesting problem! I ran into something similar recently, and yeah, at first I also thought about brute forcing it—like checking every possible subarray. But the thing is, you’d end up having to calculate averages for a LOT of combinations, especially if your array gets big. So, probably there’s a smarter way!
Well, one initial thought is: with sums, we have something called Kadane’s algorithm, which finds the maximum sum of a contiguous subarray super efficiently. But here, we’re dealing with averages, not sums directly. Hmm, does that change things much?
It turns out—averages make things trickier because they’re influenced by the subarray’s length too. So, an average might change dramatically if you add or remove elements from your subarray. But here’s a neat insight people pointed out to me once: instead of working directly with averages, you could approach this indirectly.
Like, instead of finding the maximum average directly, you could ask something like “can we find a subarray with average greater than or equal to some X?” And you sort of play around with that X value—going higher or lower until you narrow it down to the maximum average.
Here’s a rough strategy I’ve seen:
You pick a potential average value, say mid-average.
You modify each number in the array by subtracting that chosen average value.
If you find a subarray within your “modified” array whose sum is zero or positive, that means your chosen average is achievable, and you can try for an even higher average next.
If not, you drop lower and test a smaller average.
You could use something like binary search combined with a modified Kadane’s algorithm for this task. It’s something called a binary search on answer approach, and it’s pretty common in these clever tricky array problems!
As for your edge cases—yeah, they’re important to keep in mind. If the entire array or smaller segments are negative or zero, the selection would simply pick the least negative (meaning closest to zero) or actual zero as a maximum average. Those special scenarios definitely keep things interesting.
I’ve messed around with similar puzzles before, and personally, the coolest thing is how you don’t go at the problem directly. Instead, you kind of step back, change your perspective, and approach it indirectly. Pretty cool, right?
Sounds like you’re on an exciting journey with raycasting! It’s amazing how you’ve already brought walls to life, and I totally feel your itch to go further! First off, if you’re looking to expand beyond just walls, consider implementing some basic 3D geometry. One technique you might want to explorRead more
Sounds like you’re on an exciting journey with raycasting! It’s amazing how you’ve already brought walls to life, and I totally feel your itch to go further!
First off, if you’re looking to expand beyond just walls, consider implementing some basic 3D geometry. One technique you might want to explore is using Bounding Boxes for detecting intersections with objects like cars or trees. It’s a bit simpler and can help with collision checks while you’re still wrapping your head around the concepts. Later on, you can replace that with more complex shapes like Spheres or Cylinders.
For rendering curved surfaces, you could dive into Bezier curves or use Heightmaps to define more complex terrains. These allow you to create smoother shapes rather than sticking to flat planes.
Another cool approach is to look into Ray Marching. This technique can help you render complex shapes by iteratively stepping along the ray until you find the nearest surface. It’s a bit more intensive than traditional raycasting but opens up so many possibilities! You could also experiment with 3D Models—libraries like Three.js are fantastic if you want to leverage existing frameworks.
For tutorials, I’d recommend checking out YouTube or developer forums. There are some great communities where folks share their experiments and findings. Sites like GameDev Stack Exchange can be super helpful too. A little digging can reveal gems!
Keep playing around with your ideas, and don’t hesitate to share what you create. The more you explore, the clearer the pathway becomes!
Wow, that's definitely something that can drive someone crazy when dealing with performance-critical code! I totally get why scattered memory jumps are causing headaches. Here's the thing — CPUs love when you keep related data close together because they don't have to take giant leaps to fetch the nRead more
Wow, that’s definitely something that can drive someone crazy when dealing with performance-critical code! I totally get why scattered memory jumps are causing headaches. Here’s the thing — CPUs love when you keep related data close together because they don’t have to take giant leaps to fetch the next piece of data. In simple words, it’s like having everything you need neatly laid out within arm’s reach instead of scattered all over the house.
What you’re describing actually relates a lot to the idea called “cache-friendliness.” CPUs have small, fast-access storage areas called caches, and they’re way quicker than main memory. When your data is close together in memory, it’s way easier for the CPU to pull all it needs into the cache at once—which means fewer trips to the slower main memory and thus faster code execution. Think of it like grabbing several books from the same shelf instead of walking all around the library.
So, here are a few simple things you can try:
Keep related data closely packed: Instead of spreading your array elements or data structures randomly across memory, place them in a linear, closely packed arrangement. If you have structs or arrays, stick related variables inside them side-by-side.
Use blocking or chunking: Break down your larger arrays into smaller, manageable “chunks” that fit neatly inside your CPU cache. This way, the CPU grabs each chunk at once and works through it, dramatically cutting down on cache misses.
Avoid pointer hopping: Too many pointers pointing everywhere around in memory can mess up your neat arrangement. Try using contiguous memory (like arrays) over linked structures whenever possible.
Assembly directives for alignment: Many assemblers have directives like .align, which can help align your data structures neatly, ensuring they’re stored in memory locations that the CPU can access efficiently.
Here’s a little beginner-friendly example. Instead of doing something like this in assembly (pseudocode-like):
data1: db 1
; some unrelated data here
data2: db 2
; some unrelated data again
data3: db 3
You could arrange them in a clean, linear pattern to help your CPU easily cruise through:
dataArray: db 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ; All your related data stored side by side!
Also, a lot of modern compilers automatically try to arrange your data efficiently—but giving them a hand with good data structures and alignment directives can still help quite a lot.
Hopefully this clears things up a bit—happy coding and optimizing!
You're on the right track thinking about using sine waves for the bullet movement! To create that nice wavy motion while still keeping your bullets moving in the intended direction, you can indeed modify the `move` function to incorporate a sine wave based on the time elapsed. The idea is to adjustRead more
You’re on the right track thinking about using sine waves for the bullet movement! To create that nice wavy motion while still keeping your bullets moving in the intended direction, you can indeed modify the `move` function to incorporate a sine wave based on the time elapsed.
The idea is to adjust the y-coordinate to include a sine function that oscillates based on how far the bullet has traveled. Here’s a simple way to achieve that:
-- You might want to add these variables to your GameObject
self.amplitude = 10 -- How high/low the wave goes
self.frequency = 2 -- How fast the wave oscillates
function GameObject:move(dt)
-- Get linear velocity
local vX, vY = self:getVelocity()
-- Update the x position normally
self.x = self.x + vX * dt
-- Add a sine wave to the y position
self.y = self.y + vY * dt + self.amplitude * math.sin(self.frequency * self.x)
end
What this does is use the current x-position (scaled by the frequency) to determine the offset for the y-position using the sine function. The `amplitude` controls how high the wave goes, and the `frequency` controls how fast the wave oscillates. Play around with these values to get the feel you want!
By updating `self.y` like this, you’ll get that nice wavy effect while still keeping the bullets moving in the initial direction they were fired. Just keep an eye on the amplitude so it doesn’t veer off course too much!
What local coordinate range should be used for voxel chunk data access, and how is it calculated?
Sounds like you're having a classic voxel engine dilemma! From your description, it looks like the local chunk coordinates are effectively being rendered in a 0 to 15 range, which means you have 16 valid slots for blocks in both the x and z directions. This range includes the edges of the chunk—specRead more
Sounds like you’re having a classic voxel engine dilemma! From your description, it looks like the local chunk coordinates are effectively being rendered in a 0 to 15 range, which means you have 16 valid slots for blocks in both the x and z directions. This range includes the edges of the chunk—specifically, positions 0 and 15.
Since you’re using 17 x 100 x 17 for the chunk size, the extra padding around the edges is typically meant for handling neighboring chunks without causing out-of-bounds errors. So, you should definitely be using the full range from 0 to 15 for your local coordinates.
If the blocks you want to access are actually meant to be from indices 1 to 15 for some reason, then this could lead to out-of-bounds access for coordinates (0, y, 0) or (15, y, 15). Given your current logic that calculates local coordinates, it’s actually optimal to treat the coordinate space as 0 to 15.
So here’s what you can do:
local_coord.xandlocal_coord.zsince they will range from 0 to 15.To sum it up, maintain the range of 0 to 15 for accessing your blocks. You’re doing great for a rookie, and it’s totally normal to get tangled in these concepts. Just take it one step at a time!
See lessDetermine the maximum average of a contiguous subarray from a given array of numbers.
Hey, interesting problem! I ran into something similar recently, and yeah, at first I also thought about brute forcing it—like checking every possible subarray. But the thing is, you'd end up having to calculate averages for a LOT of combinations, especially if your array gets big. So, probably therRead more
Hey, interesting problem! I ran into something similar recently, and yeah, at first I also thought about brute forcing it—like checking every possible subarray. But the thing is, you’d end up having to calculate averages for a LOT of combinations, especially if your array gets big. So, probably there’s a smarter way!
Well, one initial thought is: with sums, we have something called Kadane’s algorithm, which finds the maximum sum of a contiguous subarray super efficiently. But here, we’re dealing with averages, not sums directly. Hmm, does that change things much?
It turns out—averages make things trickier because they’re influenced by the subarray’s length too. So, an average might change dramatically if you add or remove elements from your subarray. But here’s a neat insight people pointed out to me once: instead of working directly with averages, you could approach this indirectly.
Like, instead of finding the maximum average directly, you could ask something like “can we find a subarray with average greater than or equal to some X?” And you sort of play around with that X value—going higher or lower until you narrow it down to the maximum average.
Here’s a rough strategy I’ve seen:
You could use something like binary search combined with a modified Kadane’s algorithm for this task. It’s something called a binary search on answer approach, and it’s pretty common in these clever tricky array problems!
As for your edge cases—yeah, they’re important to keep in mind. If the entire array or smaller segments are negative or zero, the selection would simply pick the least negative (meaning closest to zero) or actual zero as a maximum average. Those special scenarios definitely keep things interesting.
I’ve messed around with similar puzzles before, and personally, the coolest thing is how you don’t go at the problem directly. Instead, you kind of step back, change your perspective, and approach it indirectly. Pretty cool, right?
How can I modify my raycaster to render complex scenes beyond simple wall-based structures?
Sounds like you’re on an exciting journey with raycasting! It’s amazing how you’ve already brought walls to life, and I totally feel your itch to go further! First off, if you’re looking to expand beyond just walls, consider implementing some basic 3D geometry. One technique you might want to explorRead more
Sounds like you’re on an exciting journey with raycasting! It’s amazing how you’ve already brought walls to life, and I totally feel your itch to go further!
First off, if you’re looking to expand beyond just walls, consider implementing some basic 3D geometry. One technique you might want to explore is using Bounding Boxes for detecting intersections with objects like cars or trees. It’s a bit simpler and can help with collision checks while you’re still wrapping your head around the concepts. Later on, you can replace that with more complex shapes like Spheres or Cylinders.
For rendering curved surfaces, you could dive into Bezier curves or use Heightmaps to define more complex terrains. These allow you to create smoother shapes rather than sticking to flat planes.
Another cool approach is to look into Ray Marching. This technique can help you render complex shapes by iteratively stepping along the ray until you find the nearest surface. It’s a bit more intensive than traditional raycasting but opens up so many possibilities! You could also experiment with 3D Models—libraries like Three.js are fantastic if you want to leverage existing frameworks.
For tutorials, I’d recommend checking out YouTube or developer forums. There are some great communities where folks share their experiments and findings. Sites like GameDev Stack Exchange can be super helpful too. A little digging can reveal gems!
Keep playing around with your ideas, and don’t hesitate to share what you create. The more you explore, the clearer the pathway becomes!
See lessFind the most efficient assembly for minimizing jump distances between memory locations during execution.
Wow, that's definitely something that can drive someone crazy when dealing with performance-critical code! I totally get why scattered memory jumps are causing headaches. Here's the thing — CPUs love when you keep related data close together because they don't have to take giant leaps to fetch the nRead more
Wow, that’s definitely something that can drive someone crazy when dealing with performance-critical code! I totally get why scattered memory jumps are causing headaches. Here’s the thing — CPUs love when you keep related data close together because they don’t have to take giant leaps to fetch the next piece of data. In simple words, it’s like having everything you need neatly laid out within arm’s reach instead of scattered all over the house.
What you’re describing actually relates a lot to the idea called “cache-friendliness.” CPUs have small, fast-access storage areas called caches, and they’re way quicker than main memory. When your data is close together in memory, it’s way easier for the CPU to pull all it needs into the cache at once—which means fewer trips to the slower main memory and thus faster code execution. Think of it like grabbing several books from the same shelf instead of walking all around the library.
So, here are a few simple things you can try:
.align, which can help align your data structures neatly, ensuring they’re stored in memory locations that the CPU can access efficiently.Here’s a little beginner-friendly example. Instead of doing something like this in assembly (pseudocode-like):
You could arrange them in a clean, linear pattern to help your CPU easily cruise through:
Also, a lot of modern compilers automatically try to arrange your data efficiently—but giving them a hand with good data structures and alignment directives can still help quite a lot.
Hopefully this clears things up a bit—happy coding and optimizing!
See lessHow can I implement wavy bullet movement in a specific direction using sine waves in my Lua game?
You're on the right track thinking about using sine waves for the bullet movement! To create that nice wavy motion while still keeping your bullets moving in the intended direction, you can indeed modify the `move` function to incorporate a sine wave based on the time elapsed. The idea is to adjustRead more
You’re on the right track thinking about using sine waves for the bullet movement! To create that nice wavy motion while still keeping your bullets moving in the intended direction, you can indeed modify the `move` function to incorporate a sine wave based on the time elapsed.
The idea is to adjust the y-coordinate to include a sine function that oscillates based on how far the bullet has traveled. Here’s a simple way to achieve that:
What this does is use the current x-position (scaled by the frequency) to determine the offset for the y-position using the sine function. The `amplitude` controls how high the wave goes, and the `frequency` controls how fast the wave oscillates. Play around with these values to get the feel you want!
By updating `self.y` like this, you’ll get that nice wavy effect while still keeping the bullets moving in the initial direction they were fired. Just keep an eye on the amplitude so it doesn’t veer off course too much!
See less