Author Topic: Programming Megathread  (Read 106423 times)

What things from C++14 are you actually going to use?
eh, I just went with the latest version so I'd have the most stuff available

eh, I just went with the latest version so I'd have the most stuff available
If you don't know what's added, then you're probably not using it, just sayin'

If you don't know what's added, then you're probably not using it, just sayin'

It's not like it produces any slower a program to use a C++14 compiler to compile older C++ than it is to use an older compiler to compile the same code. Actually, I would assume that they are making casual optimizations to various parts of the compiler as they go about developing it.

It's not like it produces any slower a program to use a C++14 compiler to compile older C++ than it is to use an older compiler to compile the same code. Actually, I would assume that they are making casual optimizations to various parts of the compiler as they go about developing it.
A C++14 compiler will definitely produce a faster program, but to say "using C++14" is silly.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2016, 08:22:44 PM by ZSNO »


why?
Because more than likely you won't be using any of the new features added to C++14. (Except for the compiler changes)
It's not like it's some completely new language or anything, C++ is completely backwards compatible.
Basically just say you're using C++ and use things from whatever version you want, only then can you for sure say if you need C++14 to compile or not.

So what ARE the new features in C++14 anyways, or even C++11


so are you all gonna ignore the main point of my post or

If you don't know what's added, then you're probably not using it, just sayin'
Well, if you add the new C++14 flag when you run the compiler then I can confirm you're definitely using it :P



Right now trying to replicate Ratchet & Clank 3 features in Unreal 4 for my own amusement. The goal would be to make something work in blueprint, and then replicate the exact same code in C++. If I can do this process over and over, eventually I should be good to just go straight to C++ and even start implementing some of my own ideas.

I'm starting with the "Rocket Rain" feature that you can see in Annihilation and with the giant red robots that shoot green lasers. This feature basically spawns a stack of missiles in random pattern around the area Ratchet is located, and also spawns one missle at Ratchet's current location every few seconds.

My first goal was to get some basic spawn rules in place; you can define a valid "missile zone" which is the area where missiles can land, you can add the "tick poll" that's basically just how long before the next wave of missiles is allowed to be lined up, and missiles will only launch if "Ratchet" is touching the ground (might change this). I originally was working with multi-story missile zones, but I've decided to cut that until I can work out how to do proper line tracing that won't put the decals floating in mid air.

I also got the missile template working; it places a decal on the ground until the missile expires, a missile (no graphics yet) is launched and if you're in a radius around the collision you receive damage. I started working on the material which will turn the decal from orange to red to represent how close the missile is to the ground, like in the game.

Going well so far, and enjoying it more than trying to deal with engine stuff.

Bump from second page.


Is this a good way to go about the game's processes? Or is there any stuff I need to kinda add to it?
Because it was pageloss'd.

Bump from second page.
Because it was pageloss'd.

What? Pageloss means that the page turned over and people didn't see it / didn't acknowledge it. We've been talking about your post ever since it.

What? Pageloss means that the page turned over and people didn't see it / didn't acknowledge it. We've been talking about your post ever since it.
they were talking about the C++14 thing I added to the post rather than the actual picture

they were talking about the C++14 thing I added to the post rather than the actual picture

Yeah, that doesn't make it pageloss though. You're bumping it because you want advice, and that's totally fine, but the reason you didn't get advice is because a different part of your post was more interesting, not because it was pagelost.

Yeah, that doesn't make it pageloss though. You're bumping it because you want advice, and that's totally fine, but the reason you didn't get advice is because a different part of your post was more interesting, not because it was pagelost.
fair enough, I guess