What are you working on? December 2011 Edition - Developers

[QUOTE=Ortzinator;33937786][img]http://i.imgur.com/l5Oun.png[/img][/QUOTE] Just hold F5 and watch it fly up. :v:

[img]http://i.imgur.com/25rwb.png[/img] :( Well then. You want a free DoS of somthing?

[QUOTE=Ortzinator;33937786][img]http://i.imgur.com/l5Oun.png[/img][/QUOTE] real men script their own GET requests which don't need static intervals

[QUOTE=Ortzinator;33937786][img]http://i.imgur.com/l5Oun.png[/img][/QUOTE] killponies.sh [code]#!/bin/bash for i in {0..5000} do wget http://naarkie.shellmix.com/counter.html done [/code]

[QUOTE=robmaister12;33937624]You're forgetting that the JIT compiler automatically emits SSE/MMX instructions when possible among other really nice system-specific optimizations. The C# garbage collector is actually really nice and has never gotten in my way (unlike Android's dalvik GC). A few extra megabytes of RAM is nothing when the bare minimum computers being sold have 1GB of RAM, and if you're working on a massive game that takes up 900MB of RAM, I'm sure it wouldn't be much of a challenge to optimize away 5MB of usage. Boxing/unboxing isn't an issue if you're using generics, and if reflection is slowing you down don't use it and restructure your code to not require it. There will be slightly longer startup times (we're talking milliseconds here), but that's just because the JIT is compiling MSIL to machine code. It makes for a nice "write once, compile once, deploy everywhere" system that I think is worth the extra few milliseconds the program takes to start up.[/QUOTE] Yes, I agree with you. I'm not sure what this has to do with what I said before though.

[QUOTE=amcfaggot;33937939]real men script their own GET requests which don't need static intervals[/QUOTE] Or you just hold down F5 for a bit :v:

[QUOTE=Chris220;33937982]Or you just hold down F5 for a bit :v:[/QUOTE] Except that implies that your keyboard repeat stroke rate is slower than your browser's page request and pre-render state. Otherwise, you may be invoking your browser to refresh the page before it's even completed a request to the site, thus interrupting any previous request to load the page.

[QUOTE=artanis;33937970]Yes, I agree with you. I'm not sure what this has to do with what I said before though.[/QUOTE] You said that C++ is always faster than C#. Which is wrong.

[QUOTE=Jookia;33938017]You said that C++ is always faster than C#. Which is wrong.[/QUOTE] No, it isn't. Show me a c# app and I'll show you a c++ version that is faster.

[QUOTE=artanis;33938048]No, it isn't. Show me a c# app and I'll show you a c++ version that is faster.[/QUOTE] I can'[I]t[/I] sho[I]w[/I] you an application, I don't know C#'s str[I]en[/I]g[i]t[/i]hs and C++'s weaknesses. But I do know since C# is JIT compiled, you get lovely tweaks and system-specific code that can boost the program to be faster than C++'s. This isn't real world stuff, this is theor[I]y[/I]. Even I know this stuff.

[QUOTE=amcfaggot;33938012]Except that implies that your keyboard repeat stroke rate is slower than your browser's page request and pre-render state. Otherwise, you may be invoking your browser to refresh the page before it's even completed a request to the site, thus interrupting any previous request to load the page.[/QUOTE] Worked for me! :D [editline]28th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Jookia;33938099]I can'[I]t[/I] sho[I]w[/I] you an application, I don't know C#'s str[I]en[/I]g[i]t[/i]hs and C++'s weaknesses. But I do know since C# is JIT compiled, you get lovely tweaks and system-specific code that can boost the program to be faster than C++'s. This isn't real world stuff, this is theor[I]y[/I]. Even I know this stuff.[/QUOTE] Why did you put random italics in your post?

[QUOTE=Jookia;33938099]I can'[I]t[/I] sho[I]w[/I] you an application, I don't know C#'s str[I]en[/I]g[i]t[/i]hs and C++'s weaknesses. But I do know since C# is JIT compiled, you get lovely tweaks and system-specific code that can boost the program to be faster than C++'s. This isn't real world stuff, this is theor[I]y[/I]. Even I know this stuff.[/QUOTE] Yes this is a great theory, unfortunately I've never seen it in practice and I've been a C# developer for over 5 years! I'd like to see one C# application was given some amazing speed boost by SSE/2/3 instructions and actually outperformed a rival C++ application. It just doesn't happen!

[url=http://code4k.blogspot.com/2011/03/benchmarking-cnet-direct3d-11-apis-vs.html]I know managed directX (XNA, SharpDX, SlimDX, etc.) is most definitely slower than a native implementation.[/url] I won't say one way or the other for other applications however.

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/3u0D7.png[/IMG] Oh, boy :v: SFML isn't working yet, I'm still waiting for a reply from ief014. (If you could help, PM me)

[QUOTE=artanis;33938048]No, it isn't. Show me a c# app and I'll show you a c++ version that is faster.[/QUOTE] Well the problem is that there isn't always a C++ version since C# is easier to develop with. Which is the whole point of C# if I'm not mistaken. Obviously it's not supposed to be used to code database server software, but it's for business/hobbyist/"low grade" professional software. Not having to worry (as much) about memory management alone makes it much easier. Efficiency isn't always the main goal, even in business.

[QUOTE=Naarkie;33937675][URL="http://naarkie.shellmix.com/counter.html"]Counter[/URL] am i program king yet?[/QUOTE] Did you just reset it?

[QUOTE=artanis;33938132]Yes this is a great theory, unfortunately I've never seen it in practice and I've been a C# developer for over 5 years! I'd like to see one C# application was given some amazing speed boost by SSE/2/3 instructions and actually outperformed a rival C++ application. It just doesn't happen![/QUOTE] Fuck all that it does[i]n[/i]'t happen, [i]i[/i]t's possible, thus your claim is wro[i]n[/i]g. You n[i]e[/i]ver said any[i]t[/i]hing about it b[i]e[/i]ing in the r[i]e[/i]al world. [QUOTE=Chris220;33938110]Why did you put random italics in your post?[/QUOTE] What ra[i]n[/i]dom italics?

[QUOTE=artanis;33938132]Yes this is a great theory, unfortunately I've never seen it in practice and I've been a C# developer for over 5 years! I'd like to see one C# application was given some amazing speed boost by SSE/2/3 instructions and actually outperformed a rival C++ application. It just doesn't happen![/QUOTE] We are talking about 1:1 code from C# to C++ which in some cases will perform in favor of C#. On the other hand, the fastest possible code in C++ probably performs better than fastest possible code in C# since it allows for more precise memory management.

[QUOTE=Jookia;33938203]Fuck all that it does[i]n[/i]'t happen, [i]i[/i]t's possible, thus your claim is wro[i]n[/i]g. You n[i]e[/i]ver said any[i]t[/i]hing about it b[i]e[/i]ing in the r[i]e[/i]al world. What ra[i]n[/i]dom italics?[/QUOTE] It is also possible for the c++ compiler to emit SSE instructions... so as long as the C++ is compiled for a modern cpu, it will still be faster and it will run on every PC shipped in the last 5+ years.

[QUOTE=Kepler;33938164][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/3u0D7.png[/IMG] Oh, boy :v: SFML isn't working yet, I'm still waiting for a reply from ief014. (If you could help, PM me)[/QUOTE] Do you have an ATI card? If so, use SFML 2.0 I want to use SFML 2.0 too but I am too lazy to build it

[QUOTE=Jookia;33938203]Fuck all that it does[i]n[/i]'t happen, [i]i[/i]t's possible, thus your claim is wro[i]n[/i]g. You n[i]e[/i]ver said any[i]t[/i]hing about it b[i]e[/i]ing in the r[i]e[/i]al world. What ra[i]n[/i]dom italics?[/QUOTE] You counting down to something? :ninja:

Nineteen? What

[QUOTE=uitham;33938255]Do you have an ATI card? If so, use SFML 2.0 I want to use SFML 2.0 too but I am too lazy to build it[/QUOTE] Using a nVIDIA card.

[QUOTE=Kepler;33938164][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/3u0D7.png[/IMG] Oh, boy :v: SFML isn't working yet, I'm still waiting for a reply from ief014. (If you could help, PM me)[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=uitham;33938255]Do you have an ATI card? If so, use SFML 2.0 I want to use SFML 2.0 too but I am too lazy to build it[/QUOTE] Shall I redirect you to this post: [QUOTE=ief014;33938331]Here you go, guys. I've only built them as static libs, for Visual C++ 2010. Includes both debug and releases. This is a fairly new release of them. [url]http://filesmelt.com/dl/sfml2_vs2010_static.rar[/url][/QUOTE] To Kepler: You shouldn't be using SFML 1.6 anyway. It has a bunch of bugs that 2.0 fixes. And a lot more useful features.

[QUOTE=artanis;33938231]It is also possible for the c++ compiler to emit SSE instructions... so as long as the C++ is compiled for a modern cpu, it will still be faster and it will run on every PC shipped in the last 5+ years.[/QUOTE] What ar[I]e[/I] you on about? My po[I]i[/I]nt is that if I sat down and wrote a C++ pro[i]g[/i]ram and a C# program wit[I]h[/I] specific knowledge of C#'s op[I]t[/I]imizations, and purpos[I]e[/I]ly was abl[I]e[/I] to write a case where C++ a[I]n[/I]d C# code 1:1 had C#'s optimizations make it faster, it'd disprove your point. Theoretically it is possible. [QUOTE=Tezzanator92;33938314]Nineteen? What[/QUOTE] [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqwAeILqe9Q#t=195s]I don't have time for this, I'm late for a meeting.[/url]

[QUOTE=Tezzanator92;33938314]Nineteen? What[/QUOTE] Til his next arbitrary special number.

[QUOTE=ief014;33938419]To Kepler: You shouldn't be using SFML 1.6 anyway. It has a bunch of bugs that 2.0 fixes. And a lot more useful features.[/QUOTE] Alright, I've downloaded that. I want to work on my new project for now, but thanks.

Fuck I'm trying to work on my audio player but I keep getting distracted and listening to music instead :(

[QUOTE=artanis;33938132]Yes this is a great theory, unfortunately I've never seen it in practice and I've been a C# developer for over 5 years! I'd like to see one C# application was given some amazing speed boost by SSE/2/3 instructions and actually outperformed a rival C++ application. It just doesn't happen![/QUOTE] [url]http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2008/Nov-03.html[/url] [editline]28th December 2011[/editline] there's a nice chart at the bottom of the post comparing speeds of a direct physics simulation written in C++, ported directly to C# and compiled with the new Mono.SIMD optimizations.

[QUOTE=robmaister12;33938633][url]http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2008/Nov-03.html[/url] [editline]28th December 2011[/editline] there's a nice chart at the bottom of the post comparing speeds of a direct physics simulation written in C++, ported directly to C# and compiled with the new Mono.SIMD optimizations.[/QUOTE] The benchmark is flawed. One of the commenters replied with a fixed C++ version: [url]http://cristianadam.blogspot.com/2009/01/mono-22.html[/url]