C interface as core feature

[betajaen]

the coding concepts introduced to C++ result in slower code, period.

It's a hand wave if I ever heard one.

I agree. You can be a terrible programmer in any language (C included), and it will run quite horribly. You can optimise in any language and get it running as fast as you can. It isn't the language that makes up the program, it's the programmer.

Using C as an excuse because it's as close as ASM as you can get, is not a good one, especially these days where CPUs are so incredibly fast it's difficult to tell when a program has been optimised like that. IMHO, it's best to not to worry about that sort of thing, and concentrate on something you can control; like good reliable, maintainable and portable code.

[bvanevery]

You take Ogre and 3D applications (where performance is a huge issue)

Is it? Who says I'm writing some AAA FPS title? What if I'm writing a CAD system? What if I'm writing some chinsy little casual game that's going to run on iOS, and the sum total of what the user will have to do is "match 4" ? What if it's a modal dialog or minigame in a single player RPG, like lockpicking in Oblivion, that has the same UI and performance concerns of a casual game? What if I'm just waiting for some talking head in a RPG to give me my next clue or quest, and nothing else is happening? What if I'm pushing a 3D avatar around a 2.5D old school adventure game environment, Grim Fandango style? Nothing else going on in the virtual world, it reacts solely to your actions, and no AIs to speak of.

Every cycle does not count. Save your optimization heroics for when it does.

Prove to me that Ogre couldn't benefit from a leaner coding style.

The Ogre devs themselves have proven that. I've read all the forum posts on what needs to be done for memory footprint, threads, etc. I've pulled the slides / PowerPoint presentations. Perhaps you should too. I just wanted to know whether it was worth either using or contributing to Ogre, a decision I still haven't quite made yet. But none of the "how to speed up Ogre" stuff has a darned thing to do with C vs. C++. Anything that needs to be done, can be done in C++.

[tbz]

Is it? Who says I'm writing some AAA FPS title? What if I'm writing a CAD system? What if I'm writing some chinsy little casual game that's going to run on iOS, and the sum total of what the user will have to do is "match 4" ? What if it's a modal dialog or minigame in a single player RPG, like lockpicking in Oblivion, that has the same UI and performance concerns of a casual game?

Yes, but Ogre is the basis of both performance-heavy apps and non-performance-heavy apps. Just because Ogre may be used for non-performance heavy apps does not mean it won't be used for performance heavy apps.

Every cycle does not count.

You, sir, are the king of straw men (and, in this case, ad hominem). I say that Ogre could benefit from a leaner coding style. You then misrepresent my argument to portray me as a radical fanatic who counts every CPU cycle. Never once did I say that. I did, however, say that 3D engines benefit from leaner coding styles and that C is more conducive to said styles.

The Ogre devs themselves have proven that.

So, that's why Ogre gets outperformed by many engines, mine included? Right. I see your point! They have definitely proven it! (please, please, note the sarcasm!)

But none of the "how to speed up Ogre" stuff has a darned thing to do with C vs. C++

My argument is that C is more conducive to a performance oriented coding style because it offers less convenience than C++. Technically, yes, you can write the same exact stuff in C++ as what you can in C. Proving that, however, does not disprove my argument. Please stop with the straw men, I am finding it quite tiresome to constantly rebuttal your fallacious arguments.

[bstone]

Haha, the only thing I miss from C is compilation times. I can get the same performance any day I want and I win so much in productivity, code quality, flexibility and maintenance gains. Disclaimer: that's one person's experience and yours might differ

And tbz, you should try getting a job at NASA. They still love C but you might not like it when you realize why they do

[tbz]

And tbz, you should try getting a job at NASA. They still love C but you might not like it when you realize why they do

Rofl, actually, my day job isn't too far from that...

[bstone]

I can see where all that comes from then. I'm even surprised you came down to Earth and talk to all us C++ heretics here.

[tbz]

I should really do something productive (like contribute code) instead of complaining. Meh . Anyway, I've made my point. Adieu!

[bvanevery]

Yes, but Ogre is the basis of both performance-heavy apps and non-performance-heavy apps. Just because Ogre may be used for non-performance heavy apps does not mean it won't be used for performance heavy apps.

Regarding Ogre, sure. People would like it to be faster in various areas. This does not, however, mean that one has to use C to speed up everything in a 3D app, and meticulously avoid C++. There are plenty of apps even in 3D land where the minor performance differences between C and C++ are irrelevant. Even the major performance differences between C and Lua are irrelevant, sometimes. It's appropriate to script a modal dialog or minigame in a single player RPG. The sky won't fall. Nothing else important is going on with the computer. (Well, if it's a sysadmin bogging down a production server just so they can be entertained playing a single player RPG, such a person is not to be pitied! They can either find a clever sysadmin way to get more performance, or lose their job for goofing off.)

I did, however, say that 3D engines benefit from leaner coding styles and that C is more conducive to said styles.

What you said is

the coding concepts introduced to C++ result in slower code, period.

As the rest of us have established by now, you're wrong. The nature of your error, is symptomatic of obsession with optimization to the exclusion of other factors. If you had actually said "C is more conducive to said styles" in the 1st place, I doubt we'd have as much to argue about.

So, that's why Ogre gets outperformed by many engines, mine included? Right. I see your point! They have definitely proven it! (please, please, note the sarcasm!)

Where is your open source 3d engine, or shipped game, that I can evaluate? Note I do mean open source engine. Your engine might run rings around Ogre, but if we can't use it with full control over the code, that does the rest of us no good whatsoever. Not an apples to apples comparison in that case, as Ogre would be providing something that you are not providing. Sure, doing everything "your own way" could have advantages to you personally. Doesn't mean squat in an open source context, if nobody else can make use of it.

If you haven't shipped a game with your engine, or at least produced a good chunk of a game with it, that the rest of the world can look at, then I don't care how great it's supposed to be. Until the rest of the world can see and interact with it, it's vaporware.

Nevermind how many other developers have shipped stuff with your great 3d engine. Ogre has a track record.

But none of the "how to speed up Ogre" stuff has a darned thing to do with C vs. C++

That is far too dogmatic of a statement to be true.

Actually there was 1 thing in all of the forum posts that does have to do with your thesis. An argument was made that commercial engines simply license code, rather than trying to support C++ plugin architectures. If developers want something in the code, they just modify the code, and don't worry about conforming to any external C++ class standard. Given the amount work I just did cleaning up the Ogre libs area on the wiki, I see merit in this. Because even with the plugin architecture, most people in open source land are not maintaining their Ogre lib projects. The inactive projects list is really big. It looks like the ecology was a lot healthier 3..5 years ago, but now much has bitrotted. Since the plugin ecology for the most part doesn't exist in the real world, why bother to have it as foundational to Ogre?

Please stop with the straw men, I am finding it quite tiresome to constantly rebuttal your fallacious arguments.

Methinks thou protesteth too much. How about you go read those various Ogre performance improvement threads, then contribute something that would make Ogre faster in some narrow area? You have the technical expertise to do it, if perhaps not the ideological motive. But really, what's tiring is all these stones you're throwing at Ogre or C++, if you don't have your own better 3d engine project to offer anyone else, or a shipped game / game-in-progress that we can all give props to. Are you offering something other than ideology?

[tbz]

Regarding Ogre, sure. People would like it to be faster in various areas. This does not, however, mean that one has to use C to speed up everything in a 3D app

There you go again, straw manning to the max. We are talking about Ogre and its impact on performance heavy applications. You keep straw manning to the left and the right, every chance you get. I refuse to debate with an individual who either refuses to, or is incapable of, logical debate. Please hold yourself to a higher standard or quit wasting my time. Its not a hard request.

The nature of your error, is symptomatic of obsession with optimization to the exclusion of other factors

No, just no. I have addressed this already. Please re-read my posts. And yet again, you (mis)represent me as having a "symptomatic of obsession with optimization". I have already acknowledged that performance of code is not everything. I did so in my very first post in the topic, which proves your dogmatic view of me inherently wrong. Please make sure you actually read my argument before commenting on it.

Where is your open source 3d engine, or shipped game, that I can evaluate?

What you are trying to do is another logical error (eg, ad hominem). Discrediting an opponent does not prove their argument wrong. Such an attempt is easily rebutted: By the same logic, where is yours? See how pointless arguments like this are? Your inability (or outright refusal) to comprehend these most basic building blocks of a formal debate is offensive. I refuse to debate with you unless you can actually provide a legitimate argument that doesn't deliberately misrepresent me and my argument. Enough said.

[bstone]

tbz, I think you're overreacting. bvanevery's arguments are rather sound. And he clearly meant Ogre, not some engine of his own, as the counterpart to yours.

Anyway, the debate is going nowhere. Contributing some (C++ ) code to make Ogre faster/better would be much wiser than that.

[tbz]

tbz, I think you're overreacting. bvanevery's arguments are rather sound. And he clearly meant Ogre, not some engine of his own, as the counterpart to yours.

From the very start I established that A) IMO performance-heavy apps should use a leaner coding style, and that B) C was more conducive to the said style, that D) it was my opinion, and E) that I recognized that not everyone would agree, and F) that not every project should put performance first.

He has been deliberately misrepresenting me and my argument this entire thread, painting me as a fool obsessed with performance, even blatantly lying about claims I have made in order to substantiate his dogmatic views. Of course I am irritated.

[bvanevery]

Regarding Ogre, sure. People would like it to be faster in various areas. This does not, however, mean that one has to use C to speed up everything in a 3D app

We are talking about Ogre and its impact on performance heavy applications.

That got brought up, but we were also talking about whether the minor performance improvement of C over C++ is necessary for all 3D apps. Since even a scripting language will work fine in some cases, the use of C is not always necessary. The important thing is to know what your 3D app really needs to have optimized, if anything.

your dogmatic view of me

You are very concerned with how I, or possibly other people, view you. Also, you do not like being wrong. Even if it's only on a very narrow point that doesn't matter that much in the scheme of things. The rest of us have bigger fish to fry. I predict that some day, as your career progresses through the years, you'll see the wisdom of this and will stop trying to be right about every single darned thing in technology out there. Word to the wise, there's way too much of it for anyone to get away with it, so might as well stop pretending you're infallible and never misspeak. It's... freeing, to be capable of making a mistake as a techie in public forums, without having to play all the ego games and "dogmatic view strawman" this and that yadda yadda.

Where is your open source 3d engine, or shipped game, that I can evaluate?

What you are trying to do is

get you to make a real world contribution to Ogre. In C++. Or at least get you to read those performance improvement threads, so that we're talking with the same background information and awareness. Does Ogre do everything I personally want it to do, in my ideal design universe? Nope. But it comes with other people who work on it and contribute things, who fix stuff. That might be an overriding virtue; I haven't decided yet. It's definitely the reason I showed up in the 1st place. I wasn't getting enough done on my own, and I needed to at least ask "why."

[tbz]

I predict that some day, as your career progresses through the years, you'll see the wisdom of this and will stop trying to be right about every single darned thing in technology out there.

Excuse me? For all you know I could be 12 or I could be 80. This is an excellent example of how dogmatic you are. You even take it so far as to make claims about my career. LOL.

Also, you do not like being wrong.

Says who? I have no issues admitting when I am wrong. In fact, in debate its not about being wrong or right. Its about building off of a mutual respect to gain a deeper understanding of the subject. Furthermore, I am put forward my opinion towards the goal of this thread (eg, to get C bindings), not to prove that I am right nor to gain affirmation--I want C bindings. Sorry, but this whole "must be right thing" is coming entirely from you (see projection).

You are very concerned with how I, or possibly other people, view you.

Indeed! Some random guy, who is probably a 12 year old trolling, says I am wrong on the internet! Alert the police! Oh please. Again, you are projecting. I love how you have switched from misrepresenting my argument to misrepresenting me. Again, can you not address the topic without some form of logical fallacy?

[bstone]

This is an open forum and people express their opinions here. It's a gift that we have such a place where experienced devs can meet and discuss 3d related stuff (kudos to the Ogre's team), not even mentioning the engine itself. Of course we have different views on various topics but I bet nobody comes here to make a fool of somebody else. I believe it's important to keep that in mind.

[tbz]

Of course we have different views on various topics but I bet nobody comes here to make a fool of somebody else.

*Ahem*:

You are very concerned with how I, or possibly other people, view you.

Also, you do not like being wrong.

The rest of us have bigger fish to fry

as your career progresses through the years

Are you honestly trying to defend bvanevery? Its obvious he is trying to patronize me. And that's just from his last post (there is a *lot* more). I find it ironic that when someone expresses their opinions users are permitted to respond like this. I can totally understand if he wanted to provide a formal argument to mine, but he hasn't. Right from the get-go he has been purposely misrepresenting me and my argument. It bothers me from the perspective that people lack the consideration to have a formal debate and, in turn, waste my time.

[bvanevery]

Excuse me? For all you know I could be 12 or I could be 80.

I know your relative age by the amount of "debate stress" you're attaching to all of this. I've been debating on the internet for 2 decades. You may not like that older people see patterns, that experience changes perspective. It may seem unfair. But it's true, and you'll get it someday when you're looking at it from "the other side."

Also, you do not like being wrong.

Says who?

Said me.

In this case the issue is not whether I am wrong or right, its how you are purposely hounding me.

Your style of debate, and the way you take it personally, are symptomatic of being unable to admit when you're wrong. You are unwilling to take responsibility for what you actually said. Which again was

the coding concepts introduced to C++ result in slower code, period.

Flatly: you're wrong. And I'll add another argument to that, on top of all the previous ones. It's definitely possible to code efficient, "perfect ASM" C++ code. I used to do it all the time on a 486DX2/66. I meticulously checked all the compiler output, and back in the day I knew my ASM backwards, forwards, and sideways, so believe me I know. (Or don't believe me, I don't care.) Whether you can reach "perfect ASM" or not, depends very much on the CPU you're working on, and the sophistication of the compilers you have at your disposal. As time marches on, this is an industrial ebb and flow. Some years it's easier or harder to do than others.

What do you have against me?

'Cuz you're smart enough to be better than this. You're halfway there. Heck, maybe you're two-thirds the way there. Will you please just go all the way, dive into someone else's imperfect C++ code, and make it perfect already? Your whole "must be C" worldview is a lie. There's no industrially productive reason for it. Plenty of people have reasons to use C over C++, but you're got the wrong one.

What makes your views so much more important than mine? Isn't my opinion valid, too?

• Are you getting something done for Ogre?
• Are you getting something done for your own work, much faster than using Ogre?
• Can anyone else benefit from what you are doing?
• Can you show the rest of us how to make a lot of money writing 3D games or other 3D apps, and have fun while we're at it?

[tbz]

No, bvanevery, just no. You are setting it up so there is no way for me to win. First you establish that I am a stressed, that I don't like being wrong, and that I am young. Now, how can I defend myself without falling prey to your trap? Its quite genius, actually, what you have done here. You where purposely derogative in order to instigate a specific response from me just so you could paint me like this, and, I'll be honest, I shouldn't have fallen for your trollbait. Of that I admit I was mistaken.

The only thing, IMO, that you have proven is that you are an expert troll. Of that there is no doubt. As to my age, career, stress level, etc, I would kindly ask you to apologize. Not because I admit to what you accuse me of, but rather because I feel you have been, simply put, rude and arrogant, and I want an apology for it. Make all the claims you want to about me, I still want that apology.

[bvanevery]

I will consider apologies when you yourself take responsibility for your strong tone regarding C vs. C++, and the implications you've directed towards Ogre. I will also say, you are not the first "3d jock" to walk into a (virtual) room and think he can show everybody else up. When you're ready to work with other devs on more important things, rather than this being all about you, let people know. Meanwhile, those forum threads about how to improve Ogre performance are good reading.

[tbz]

I will consider apologies when you yourself take responsibility for your strong tone regarding C vs. C++

I will not apologize for my opinion, and I am sorry, but I refuse to bow down and worship you and your opinion, no matter how much you insult me.

and the implications you've directed towards Ogre.

Yes, I quote myself: "Now, I don't want you too take this the wrong way, because Ogre is a great engine and you guys have done a great job. Its just that, personally, I prefer trading the productivity of C++ for a more performance-oriented development style. It takes longer and is harder too use, but I find the benefits are worth it. That's my personal opinion, and I realize its not for everyone."

Your animosity towards me is seriously misplaced.

I will also say, you are not the first "3d jock" to walk into a (virtual) room and think he can show everybody else up.

You know, I think if you where going to get it the last 3 times I said that I wasn't here for affirmation you would have got it by now, but you haven't, so why bother? YES, I am here to prove you all wrong! I admit it! All hail bvanevery, he knows more about you than you do!

rather than this being all about you, let people know

You are the one attacking and berating me. Its you that has made this about me. Way to misplace blame. I sure hope you don't treat your coworkers (or, family) like this. Or, maybe the internet is just your outlet, to release all that narcissistic rage? If that's the case, its cool, better you take it all out on me than your kids.

Back on topic: I would +1 the idea for C bindings to Ogre, and I might even be able able/wiling to help out with that. It shouldn't be too hard using flex/bison or SWIG.

[bstone]

Oh oh, that went way too far and I feel responsible for all this mess now. Here's my lesson for not keeping my mouth shut during a longer build.

[bvanevery]

and the implications you've directed towards Ogre.

I know this probably is going to ruffle some feathers, but the coding concepts introduced to C++ result in slower code, period. C++ trades performance for productivity and convenience. Its a trade-off. I have had this debate a hundred times with C++ lovers (and I don't think I've ever convinced one of them, lol), but I have (as of yet) to find a single C++ programmer who could best my C applications. Its like the engine I was referring too. In my engine that terrain renders at around 200 FPS. On the same PC being ported to Ogre it gets around 50 FPS . My previous engine was doing bloom/hdr passes and shadow mapping, too! I have those disabled in my Ogre version right now.

Yes, I quote myself: "Now, I don't want you too take this the wrong way, because Ogre is a great engine and you guys have done a great job. Its just that, personally, I prefer trading the productivity of C++ for a more performance-oriented development style. It takes longer and is harder too use, but I find the benefits are worth it. That's my personal opinion, and I realize its not for everyone."

Translation: Ogre is insufficiently performance-oriented because it uses C++. No C++ programmers can beat your C code. You expect no one to take offense? Especially when your technical claim about C vs. C++ is wrong? Maybe the next time you recognize the need for qualifiers like "I know this probably is going to ruffle some feathers," and "I don't want you too take this the wrong way," you should either think better of posting it, or rephrase it, or heck even be honest about how you're about to diss on other people's work. If you genuinely meant no offense, well, try some redrafting strategies with an eye towards tact. Bad examples: "No offense, but eating carbs always makes you fat, and I prefer a diet based on vegetables, I realize this is not for everybody." "No offense, but fake tans are terrible. Did you get yours from a clinic? I prefer to sit on the beach, I know that's not for everybody." Do you see why these phraseologies are offensive, and how they are similar to yours regarding C++ and Ogre?

Back on topic: I would +1 the idea for C bindings to Ogre, and I might even be able able/wiling to help out with that. It shouldn't be too hard using flex/bison or SWIG.

Have you looked at the llcoi code mentioned in this thread?

[spacegaier]

/*
Guys, please cool down! I definitely don't want to close down that thread here, because the topic itself is very valid and worthy to be discussed. But if this drifts into personal attacks/vendettas, we won't have that here!

So, everyone take a step back and focus on the actual topic without any sub-text and please remember: Different cultures, different languages, different styles, different personalities...so take every post with a grain of salt plus a healthy dose of "chilling" and tone it down a notch since in this virtual world stuff tends to heat up quite fast.

Thanks!

*/

[tbz]

Translation: Ogre is insufficiently performance-oriented because it uses C++.

No. Translation: I prefer a C style of coding which-in my opinion-helps programmers write more efficient code because it provides fewer conveniences than C++, and that this style of coding is not for everyone, as sometimes productivity, and other factors, have larger impact on the project. Therefore, those of us who prefer coding in C have another reason to use Ogre in our projects (because it has C bindings). You've been misrepresenting my view right from the start (ergo, the "please quit straw manning me" requests).

you should either think better of posting it, or rephrase it, or heck even be honest about how you're about to diss on other people's work.

I wasn't "dissing" on anyone's work. I was merely stating that I preferred a different method, and that C bindings would allow me to use that method, and for that reason I support the idea in this thread. I even took the time to complement the project and clarify to make sure that nobody misunderstood what I was saying. But, I guess if someone is hellbent on assuming I am insulting them, then there is no way I can phrase it without them taking offense .

[jacmoe]

I am not going to pretend that I've read the dispute that has happened in my topic of late, but the main motivation behind the 'C interface' idea is because C++ is absolutely horrid to bind anything against, except C++.
Due to the ABI.
I know only of Angelscript - and perhaps Chaiscript - which binds elegantly with it.

I am not going to wage any language war, but I sense that C is seeing a renaissance of late.

I would only bind Ogre to be able to bind it with other languages, not because I wanted to use it from a C perspective.
I think there's at least two other, very modern and well-written engines written in C, which would make it a lot more pleasurable if one were to take the route of C.
Because it's written in C, and taking full advantage of what C has to offer.

[AshMcConnell]

I know your relative age by the amount of "debate stress" you're attaching to all of this.

Definitely a master of debating. Every thread I've seen lately with your name in it has degraded into a shouting match. You might want to be a bit more civil.