Hey there! Diving into voxel engines sounds super exciting, and you're right, setting up the rendering structures can get a bit tricky, especially with transparent blocks and all. Here's what I think about the three options you mentioned: Option 1: 2 VAOs, VBOs, and EBOs for each chunk This way seemRead more
Hey there! Diving into voxel engines sounds super exciting, and you’re right, setting up the rendering structures can get a bit tricky, especially with transparent blocks and all. Here’s what I think about the three options you mentioned:
Option 1: 2 VAOs, VBOs, and EBOs for each chunk
This way seems to have the most organization since opaque and transparent blocks are totally separated. But, yeah, managing all those VAOs and VBOs can become a hassle, especially when you’re cranking out a lot of chunks. I mean, every time you add a new chunk or modify one, you’ve got more stuff to keep track of!
Option 2: 1 VAO and 2 VBOs and EBOs
This one feels a bit more efficient. Having just one VAO per chunk means fewer resources to manage, which is nice. But I’m a bit worried about mixing different block types in the rendering pipeline. You might end up with some performance hits if you have to switch states a lot!
Option 3: Single terrain with 2 VAOs
This option sounds pretty sleek! Fewer state changes could definitely boost performance. But as you said, managing chunks might get complex since you’re grouping them all together. You might need to keep a close eye on how things overlap and whether this approach complicates your code more than necessary.
Honestly, I think the second option is a solid middle-ground unless you have a super strong reason to go with one of the others. Just keep an eye on performance benchmarks as you develop — sometimes it’s all about trial and error. And yeah, don’t forget tools like frustum culling to help with rendering only what’s visible.
It sounds like you’ve got a pretty interesting challenge on your hands! Aligning these transforms can definitely get tricky, especially when accounting for all the transformations. Here are some thoughts that might help you troubleshoot your alignment issue: 1. **Check Local vs World TransformationsRead more
It sounds like you’ve got a pretty interesting challenge on your hands! Aligning these transforms can definitely get tricky, especially when accounting for all the transformations. Here are some thoughts that might help you troubleshoot your alignment issue:
1. **Check Local vs World Transformations**: Make sure you’re converting everything correctly. When you’re working with local transforms (like the positions of A and B), they need to be transformed into the world space before you try to align them to C and D. You can do this by using the localToWorldMatrix or similar functions in your framework.
2. **Rotation Issues**: This part can be a bit messy if you’re not careful. When aligning rotations, make sure you’re not just using cross products blindly. Instead, consider using quaternions if your framework supports them, as they can help prevent gimbal lock and make rotations smoother. If you’re using Euler angles, remember that the order of applying those rotations matters!
3. **Scale Considerations**: Scaling can affect your positioning as well. When you calculate the world position for A and B, don’t forget to multiply the local position by the scale of the parent object (F in this case). This means you need to take the scale of F into account when determining where A and B should go.
4. **Debugging the Alignment**: It might help to visualize the transformation matrices you’re using. If your framework allows it, try logging the world positions of A and B before you attempt to align them, and do the same for C and D. This way, you can see where the discrepancies lie.
5. **Common Pitfalls**: One common mistake is assuming the alignment is absolute rather than relative. Make sure you’re calculating the transformation relative to the correct point in space. If there’s any offset or parent transform involved, it could throw off your calculations.
6. **Incremental Debugging**: Try aligning the positions first without worrying about rotations, and then once that’s solid, move on to rotations. Sometimes breaking it down into smaller steps can reveal what’s going wrong.
Hopefully, these tips provide a starting point for your troubleshooting! Transformations can get super complex, but with some testing and visualization, you’ll be able to figure it out!
Okay, so I've never really done a Code Golf challenge before, but this sounds fun! I'm not 100% sure if this would be optimal, but I found a super simple way to print your user ID using Python: print("123456") #replace 123456 with your actual user ID Basically, all this does is directly print your uRead more
Okay, so I’ve never really done a Code Golf challenge before, but this sounds fun! I’m not 100% sure if this would be optimal, but I found a super simple way to print your user ID using Python:
print("123456") #replace 123456 with your actual user ID
Basically, all this does is directly print your user ID as text. I mean, it’s literally the simplest possible solution—probably not too creative, lol. And definitely it’s short enough to be under 50 bytes!
But if you wanna be a bit fancier, you could use JavaScript like this:
console.log(123456) // your user ID goes here
This is just as minimal, just logs your number directly into the console. I guess both Python and JavaScript make it really easy because you can just drop the number right there without having to do anything weird.
Then someone mentioned handling invalid input, and honestly, I hadn’t thought about that. Maybe you’d need to take input and check if it’s valid first. If you’re gonna do that, something longer might be necessary, like:
uid = input("Enter ID: ")
if uid.isdigit():
print(uid)
else:
print("Oops! That's not a valid ID.")
But that’s definitely longer—not very “golfy” anymore. So yeah, this was my super basic take on it! Curious to see how everyone else figures it out, especially in languages I’m not familiar with!
Sounds like you're hitting a pretty common snag with converting mouse coordinates to world space in Unreal Engine, especially for a 2D game! The `ConvertMouseToWorldSpace` function should usually do the trick, but if it’s giving you weird values, it might be worth checking a few things. First off, mRead more
Sounds like you’re hitting a pretty common snag with converting mouse coordinates to world space in Unreal Engine, especially for a 2D game! The `ConvertMouseToWorldSpace` function should usually do the trick, but if it’s giving you weird values, it might be worth checking a few things.
First off, make sure your camera settings are consistent and that you’re actually looking at the right area of the world. Sometimes, if the camera is off or has weird scaling, it messes up the calculations. If your character is positioned at X=-500 and Z=700, that’s like halfway up in the world; just double-checking where your camera is pointing can help.
If the `ConvertMouseToWorldSpace` isn’t cutting it, you could try using a combination of other functions. One trick is to use `DeprojectScreenToWorld`, which can be more reliable for what you’re trying to achieve. This function takes the screen coordinates (like your mouse cursor position) and transforms them into a world location, accounting for the camera’s view and projection.
Here’s a step-by-step idea:
Get the mouse position on the screen.
Use `DeprojectScreenToWorld` to convert that position into world space.
Adjust the Z value if needed (in 2D, you might want that to stay constant or go to a specific layer).
This method should give you a more accurate point in world space that corresponds with your cursor. Just remember that in 2D, you might not need that full 3D space handling, so you can refine the Z value when you get your world location.
Give that a shot! And don’t hesitate to tweak your camera settings if things still feel off. It can be a bit of a puzzle figuring out how all these pieces fit together, but you’ll get there!
Hey there! It sounds like you're diving deep into some pretty interesting stuff with memory management, especially for game dev. So, you’ve got this `Entities` struct that's quite sizable, and you're using stack memory for it? I totally get why you're second-guessing that choice! The stack is indeedRead more
Hey there! It sounds like you’re diving deep into some pretty interesting stuff with memory management, especially for game dev. So, you’ve got this `Entities` struct that’s quite sizable, and you’re using stack memory for it? I totally get why you’re second-guessing that choice!
The stack is indeed super fast for allocations and is great when you have temporary data, but as you mentioned, it doesn’t handle larger or persistent data really well. Stack overflow could definitely be a risk if your `Entities` struct takes up a lot of space and you’re trying to do more stuff on the stack at the same time.
Shifting to a Memory Arena sounds like a solid plan! It would free you from the potential worries of stack overflow and give you more control over memory during the game. Plus, the fact that you can allocate a bunch of entities all at once and then just clean up later seems like a huge win, especially for managing the lifecycle of entities that need to stick around.
From what I’ve heard, using a Memory Arena isn’t overkill for something like an entity pool at all! A lot of devs find that it simplifies their life, especially with dealing with lots of entities that have the same lifetime. I think the main performance hit when going from stack to heap generally tends to be in allocation speed, but with a well-implemented Memory Arena, you might not even notice much difference.
In some cases, stack memory might still be beneficial when you’re dealing with smaller structs or temporary data that you’re done with very quickly. It can give you super fast allocations without needing to manage the memory manually. But for something as critical as your `Entities`, it sounds like a smart move to go the arena route.
Hope this helps you out a bit in figuring things out! Good luck with your game development!
What is the most efficient structure for rendering Minecraft-like voxel chunks using VAO, VBO, and EBO in OpenGL?
Hey there! Diving into voxel engines sounds super exciting, and you're right, setting up the rendering structures can get a bit tricky, especially with transparent blocks and all. Here's what I think about the three options you mentioned: Option 1: 2 VAOs, VBOs, and EBOs for each chunk This way seemRead more
Hey there! Diving into voxel engines sounds super exciting, and you’re right, setting up the rendering structures can get a bit tricky, especially with transparent blocks and all. Here’s what I think about the three options you mentioned:
Option 1: 2 VAOs, VBOs, and EBOs for each chunk
This way seems to have the most organization since opaque and transparent blocks are totally separated. But, yeah, managing all those VAOs and VBOs can become a hassle, especially when you’re cranking out a lot of chunks. I mean, every time you add a new chunk or modify one, you’ve got more stuff to keep track of!
Option 2: 1 VAO and 2 VBOs and EBOs
This one feels a bit more efficient. Having just one VAO per chunk means fewer resources to manage, which is nice. But I’m a bit worried about mixing different block types in the rendering pipeline. You might end up with some performance hits if you have to switch states a lot!
Option 3: Single terrain with 2 VAOs
This option sounds pretty sleek! Fewer state changes could definitely boost performance. But as you said, managing chunks might get complex since you’re grouping them all together. You might need to keep a close eye on how things overlap and whether this approach complicates your code more than necessary.
Honestly, I think the second option is a solid middle-ground unless you have a super strong reason to go with one of the others. Just keep an eye on performance benchmarks as you develop — sometimes it’s all about trial and error. And yeah, don’t forget tools like frustum culling to help with rendering only what’s visible.
Hope that helps a bit! Happy coding!
See lessHow can I accurately align two local points with two world space positions considering position, scale, and rotation?
It sounds like you’ve got a pretty interesting challenge on your hands! Aligning these transforms can definitely get tricky, especially when accounting for all the transformations. Here are some thoughts that might help you troubleshoot your alignment issue: 1. **Check Local vs World TransformationsRead more
It sounds like you’ve got a pretty interesting challenge on your hands! Aligning these transforms can definitely get tricky, especially when accounting for all the transformations. Here are some thoughts that might help you troubleshoot your alignment issue:
1. **Check Local vs World Transformations**: Make sure you’re converting everything correctly. When you’re working with local transforms (like the positions of A and B), they need to be transformed into the world space before you try to align them to C and D. You can do this by using the localToWorldMatrix or similar functions in your framework.
2. **Rotation Issues**: This part can be a bit messy if you’re not careful. When aligning rotations, make sure you’re not just using cross products blindly. Instead, consider using quaternions if your framework supports them, as they can help prevent gimbal lock and make rotations smoother. If you’re using Euler angles, remember that the order of applying those rotations matters!
3. **Scale Considerations**: Scaling can affect your positioning as well. When you calculate the world position for A and B, don’t forget to multiply the local position by the scale of the parent object (F in this case). This means you need to take the scale of F into account when determining where A and B should go.
4. **Debugging the Alignment**: It might help to visualize the transformation matrices you’re using. If your framework allows it, try logging the world positions of A and B before you attempt to align them, and do the same for C and D. This way, you can see where the discrepancies lie.
5. **Common Pitfalls**: One common mistake is assuming the alignment is absolute rather than relative. Make sure you’re calculating the transformation relative to the correct point in space. If there’s any offset or parent transform involved, it could throw off your calculations.
6. **Incremental Debugging**: Try aligning the positions first without worrying about rotations, and then once that’s solid, move on to rotations. Sometimes breaking it down into smaller steps can reveal what’s going wrong.
Hopefully, these tips provide a starting point for your troubleshooting! Transformations can get super complex, but with some testing and visualization, you’ll be able to figure it out!
See lessCreate a program that outputs your user ID on Code Golf.
Okay, so I've never really done a Code Golf challenge before, but this sounds fun! I'm not 100% sure if this would be optimal, but I found a super simple way to print your user ID using Python: print("123456") #replace 123456 with your actual user ID Basically, all this does is directly print your uRead more
Okay, so I’ve never really done a Code Golf challenge before, but this sounds fun! I’m not 100% sure if this would be optimal, but I found a super simple way to print your user ID using Python:
Basically, all this does is directly print your user ID as text. I mean, it’s literally the simplest possible solution—probably not too creative, lol. And definitely it’s short enough to be under 50 bytes!
But if you wanna be a bit fancier, you could use JavaScript like this:
This is just as minimal, just logs your number directly into the console. I guess both Python and JavaScript make it really easy because you can just drop the number right there without having to do anything weird.
Then someone mentioned handling invalid input, and honestly, I hadn’t thought about that. Maybe you’d need to take input and check if it’s valid first. If you’re gonna do that, something longer might be necessary, like:
But that’s definitely longer—not very “golfy” anymore. So yeah, this was my super basic take on it! Curious to see how everyone else figures it out, especially in languages I’m not familiar with!
See lessHow can I accurately convert screen cursor position to world-space in Unreal Engine for a 2D game?
Sounds like you're hitting a pretty common snag with converting mouse coordinates to world space in Unreal Engine, especially for a 2D game! The `ConvertMouseToWorldSpace` function should usually do the trick, but if it’s giving you weird values, it might be worth checking a few things. First off, mRead more
Sounds like you’re hitting a pretty common snag with converting mouse coordinates to world space in Unreal Engine, especially for a 2D game! The `ConvertMouseToWorldSpace` function should usually do the trick, but if it’s giving you weird values, it might be worth checking a few things.
First off, make sure your camera settings are consistent and that you’re actually looking at the right area of the world. Sometimes, if the camera is off or has weird scaling, it messes up the calculations. If your character is positioned at X=-500 and Z=700, that’s like halfway up in the world; just double-checking where your camera is pointing can help.
If the `ConvertMouseToWorldSpace` isn’t cutting it, you could try using a combination of other functions. One trick is to use `DeprojectScreenToWorld`, which can be more reliable for what you’re trying to achieve. This function takes the screen coordinates (like your mouse cursor position) and transforms them into a world location, accounting for the camera’s view and projection.
Here’s a step-by-step idea:
This method should give you a more accurate point in world space that corresponds with your cursor. Just remember that in 2D, you might not need that full 3D space handling, so you can refine the Z value when you get your world location.
Give that a shot! And don’t hesitate to tweak your camera settings if things still feel off. It can be a bit of a puzzle figuring out how all these pieces fit together, but you’ll get there!
See lessIs it better to use stack memory or a Memory Arena for storing large game structs like Entities and MapData?
Hey there! It sounds like you're diving deep into some pretty interesting stuff with memory management, especially for game dev. So, you’ve got this `Entities` struct that's quite sizable, and you're using stack memory for it? I totally get why you're second-guessing that choice! The stack is indeedRead more
Hey there! It sounds like you’re diving deep into some pretty interesting stuff with memory management, especially for game dev. So, you’ve got this `Entities` struct that’s quite sizable, and you’re using stack memory for it? I totally get why you’re second-guessing that choice!
The stack is indeed super fast for allocations and is great when you have temporary data, but as you mentioned, it doesn’t handle larger or persistent data really well. Stack overflow could definitely be a risk if your `Entities` struct takes up a lot of space and you’re trying to do more stuff on the stack at the same time.
Shifting to a Memory Arena sounds like a solid plan! It would free you from the potential worries of stack overflow and give you more control over memory during the game. Plus, the fact that you can allocate a bunch of entities all at once and then just clean up later seems like a huge win, especially for managing the lifecycle of entities that need to stick around.
From what I’ve heard, using a Memory Arena isn’t overkill for something like an entity pool at all! A lot of devs find that it simplifies their life, especially with dealing with lots of entities that have the same lifetime. I think the main performance hit when going from stack to heap generally tends to be in allocation speed, but with a well-implemented Memory Arena, you might not even notice much difference.
In some cases, stack memory might still be beneficial when you’re dealing with smaller structs or temporary data that you’re done with very quickly. It can give you super fast allocations without needing to manage the memory manually. But for something as critical as your `Entities`, it sounds like a smart move to go the arena route.
Hope this helps you out a bit in figuring things out! Good luck with your game development!
See less