From: Pal-Kristian Engstad <pal_engstad@naughtydog.com>
To: Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com>
Cc: "caml-list@yquem.inria.fr" <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] stl?
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 18:15:20 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49AF35B8.9030104@naughtydog.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200903050131.03494.jon@ffconsultancy.com>
Jon Harrop wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 March 2009 23:18:21 Pal-Kristian Engstad wrote:
>
>> Sure -- those are probably not jobs that require performance, nor have
>> resource constraints.
>>
>
> I do not believe that C++ is significantly faster or better at handling
> resources than higher-level languages.
>
Have you ever tried to conform to a specific memory layout? We are often
talking directly to hardware, and in those cases it is a prerequisite to
be able to produce data that is in the exact format prescribed. Often
these things are, put an 17-bit ID followed by a 3-bit CODE followed by
a 12-bit LENGTH field, after which follows LENGTH items each of size
that is some-function-of CODE.
This is usually not a problem when a small part of your data needs to be
described this way, but when a large portion of your data needs this
formatting, you can see that OCaml or Haskell records simply doesn't
work very well.
>> I did say most. By the way, XNA is a toy. A good toy, but a toy,
>> nonetheless.
>>
>
> Note the irony that games are toys. :-)
>
For the consumer, yes, games are toys. Making games (as well as toys) is
quite a different story. We're talking multi-million dollar projects here.
>>>> * Most high-level languages can not support multiple forms of data
>>>> allocations. Some applications need a range of allocation
>>>> strategies, ranging from completely automatic (garbage collection)
>>>> to completely manual.
>>>>
>>> C++ cannot provide efficient automatic GC.
>>>
>> That's not true. We run GC on all of our game tasks. It's "manual"-ish,
>> but doable.
>>
>
> If it is "manual-ish" then it is not automatic!
>
It is automatic in the sense that it garbage collects automatically at a
specific time in the frame. It is manual in the sense that you have to
annotate pointers and other reference like things (e.g. indexes).
>>>> * Most high-level environments do not allow for fine-grained control
>>>> of computing resources, e.g. soft real-time guarantees.
>>>>
>>> Many high-level languages make it easier to satisfy soft
>>> real-time "guarantees", e.g. incremental collection vs destructor
>>> avalanches.
>>>
>> Call me cynical, but I simply don't buy it.
>>
>
> I found that when porting Smoke from C++ to OCaml. The worst case performance
> (which was the problem) got 5x faster in OCaml because the GC did the
> incremental work that I never managed to get my STL allocators to do
> effectively. I realised I was just Greenspunning what modern languages
> already had and that prompted me to drop C++.
>
It is fairly rare for us to use STL (at least for the run-time portion
of a game), probably for the reason that you mention. We tend to make
algorithms and data-structures targeted for the use case.
>> Indeed. But then there are target specific control registers, timers,
>> etc. etc. Usually, these are not supported well.
>>
>
> So C++ has legacy support for them but they change as hardware evolves and
> there is no reason why VMs cannot also support them.
>
True. But do they? Usually not. It is forgotten, deemed a non-important
thing. The thing is, when you /need/ a hardware specific feature, there
is usually no out. That was what I was trying to address.
>> Well, first of all - something that doesn't suck performance wise. And
>> it is essential that it works on non-Intel platforms. F# is indeed
>> promising, but again - I would not use it for performance critical code
>> - which is about 30-50% of a game's code base.
>>
>
> Those are quite tame requirements, IMHO. I'd recommend Cilk.
>
Cilk supports programming multi-threaded applications on shared-memory
multiprocessors. That doesn't seem to be applicable to the CELL/SPU
architecture, for instance. However, I will investigate it further.
>>>> Of course, you can always say that you can use the foreign function
>>>> interface, but then you lose inlining and speed.
>>>>
>>> The same is true of C/C++. You can get much better performance from
>>> assembler but calling assembler from C or C++ not only costs inlining and
>>> speed but even functionality because you have an ABI to conform to.
>>>
>> This is not true. Pretty much all C++ compilers have both intrinsic and
>> inline assembly support.
>>
>
> Ok but that is not specific to C++.
>
Just another thing that language developers "forget" on the way.
>>>> More importantly, you end up with a project with several different
>>>> languages. That is generally a very bad idea.
>>>>
>>> A common language run-time is the right solution, not C/C++.
>>>
>> That is exactly my point. It needs to be *one* language that can cover
>> the broad base from non-performance critical AI code to performance
>> critical culling, animation and physics code.
>>
>
> A common intermediate representation shared between different front-end
> languages would suffice.
>
Are you talking about JIT? Unfortunately, for most consoles you are not
allowed to write to code-pages, which precludes JIT. Everything must be
pre-compiled to assembly.
>> But the sad fact is that
>> there is no competitor to C++. Mind you - I *want* to have something
>> else - it is just not feasible.
>>
>
> I really don't see why. For example, surely OCaml+LLVM beats C++ in every way
> that you have described.
>
LLVM is very interesting indeed, and would be my preferred back-end.
> Moreover, something like my HLVM, which is specifically designed for
> high-performance computing, should make that vastly easier than C++. It even
> supports features like optional GC because my GC is written in my IR (and I
> don't want to GC my GC ;-).
>
Nice... :-) When will you release your first version?
PKE.
--
Pål-Kristian Engstad (engstad@naughtydog.com),
Lead Graphics & Engine Programmer,
Naughty Dog, Inc., 1601 Cloverfield Blvd, 6000 North,
Santa Monica, CA 90404, USA. Ph.: (310) 633-9112.
"Emacs would be a far better OS if it was shipped with
a halfway-decent text editor." -- Slashdot, Dec 13. 2005.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-05 2:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-03 21:40 stl? Raoul Duke
2009-03-03 22:31 ` [Caml-list] stl? Yoann Padioleau
2009-03-03 22:42 ` Till Varoquaux
2009-03-03 23:36 ` Jon Harrop
2009-03-04 0:13 ` Peng Zang
2009-03-04 0:58 ` Yoann Padioleau
2009-03-04 1:10 ` Raoul Duke
2009-03-04 1:19 ` Pal-Kristian Engstad
2009-03-04 1:21 ` Yoann Padioleau
2009-03-04 1:29 ` Jon Harrop
2009-03-04 14:26 ` Kuba Ober
2009-03-04 14:24 ` Kuba Ober
2009-03-03 23:42 ` Jon Harrop
2009-03-04 0:11 ` Brian Hurt
2009-03-04 1:05 ` Yoann Padioleau
2009-03-04 4:56 ` Brian Hurt
2009-03-04 20:11 ` Yoann Padioleau
2009-03-04 21:59 ` Brian Hurt
2009-03-04 22:42 ` Yoann Padioleau
2009-03-04 23:19 ` Jon Harrop
2009-03-04 23:03 ` Jon Harrop
2009-03-11 3:16 ` Brian Hurt
2009-03-11 5:57 ` David Rajchenbach-Teller
2009-03-11 6:11 ` David Rajchenbach-Teller
2009-03-04 1:59 ` Jon Harrop
2009-03-04 6:11 ` Brian Hurt
2009-03-04 14:08 ` Christophe TROESTLER
2009-03-04 14:19 ` Peng Zang
2009-03-04 16:14 ` Brian Hurt
2009-03-04 16:35 ` Andreas Rossberg
2009-03-04 16:40 ` Peng Zang
2009-03-04 21:43 ` Nicolas Pouillard
2009-03-05 11:24 ` Wolfgang Lux
2009-03-04 19:45 ` Jon Harrop
2009-03-04 21:23 ` Brian Hurt
2009-03-04 23:17 ` Jon Harrop
2009-03-05 2:26 ` stl? Stefan Monnier
2009-03-04 3:10 ` [Caml-list] stl? Martin Jambon
2009-03-04 6:18 ` Brian Hurt
2009-03-04 16:35 ` Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen
2009-03-04 16:48 ` Yoann Padioleau
2009-03-04 20:07 ` Jon Harrop
2009-03-04 20:31 ` Richard Jones
2009-03-04 20:49 ` Yoann Padioleau
2009-03-04 21:20 ` Andreas Rossberg
2009-03-04 21:51 ` Pal-Kristian Engstad
2009-03-04 22:50 ` Jon Harrop
2009-03-04 23:18 ` Pal-Kristian Engstad
2009-03-05 1:31 ` Jon Harrop
2009-03-05 2:15 ` Pal-Kristian Engstad [this message]
2009-03-05 3:26 ` Jon Harrop
2009-03-05 6:22 ` yoann padioleau
2009-03-05 7:02 ` Raoul Duke
2009-03-05 8:07 ` Erick Tryzelaar
2009-03-05 9:06 ` Richard Jones
2009-03-05 9:34 ` malc
2009-03-05 9:56 ` Richard Jones
2009-03-05 10:49 ` malc
2009-03-05 11:16 ` Richard Jones
2009-03-05 12:39 ` malc
2009-03-05 19:39 ` Jon Harrop
2009-03-05 21:10 ` Pal-Kristian Engstad
2009-03-05 22:41 ` Richard Jones
2009-03-05 22:53 ` malc
2009-03-05 8:59 ` Richard Jones
2009-03-05 17:50 ` Raoul Duke
2009-03-05 8:17 ` Kuba Ober
2009-03-05 1:06 ` Jon Harrop
2009-03-05 9:09 ` Richard Jones
2009-03-05 20:44 ` Jon Harrop
2009-03-05 20:50 ` Jake Donham
2009-03-05 21:28 ` [Caml-list] OCaml's intermediate representations Jon Harrop
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=49AF35B8.9030104@naughtydog.com \
--to=pal_engstad@naughtydog.com \
--cc=caml-list@yquem.inria.fr \
--cc=jon@ffconsultancy.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).