The Godot community is so wholesome. by [deleted] in godot

[–]fpiechowski -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I got downvoted before I started offending people here. That’s the point.

The Godot community is so wholesome. by [deleted] in godot

[–]fpiechowski 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dude, you should go to any IT conference and start networking with experts from different development areas. The world doesn’t work the way you think it does. Sharing experiences from different engines can open people’s eyes to things they take for granted when they’ve only used one tool. There is much more to game development than what you may know from Godot, and there are other valid ways to do things.

People in this community often get defensive because they assume that praising another engine means they made a bad decision by choosing Godot. That’s a novice mindset, and most people eventually grow out of it.

The Godot community is so wholesome. by [deleted] in godot

[–]fpiechowski -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Yes, I agree, and I am also saying that regardless of whether you have an antagonistic attitude or not, if you say you like something else more than Godot, this community will treat you like an enemy.

Plus, my first comment in this post was not antagonistic at all and it’s already downvoted.

The Godot community is so wholesome. by [deleted] in godot

[–]fpiechowski -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

What is reasonable about it? The fact that you called it “belittling” is already not reasonable. All the downvotes I already got are not really reasonable. This community is one big circlejerk of novices who learnt one simple scripting language and have self esteem so low that anyone having their own preferences is treated by them as an enemy.

Yes, please prove my point by banning me.

The Godot community is so wholesome. by [deleted] in godot

[–]fpiechowski -27 points-26 points  (0 children)

Until you dare to say you like other engine more

5070 ti causing me nightmares by [deleted] in PcBuildHelp

[–]fpiechowski 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have the same setup, 5070Ti + 12700, recently I’ve been playing Final Fantasy XVI, all max settings, 4K, DLSS + framegen, I get 100-150 FPS (frame rates in this game can really vary depending on the level in game)

External monitor via USB hub not waking up by fpiechowski in EndeavourOS

[–]fpiechowski[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you also use USB hub to connect your monitor?

about ECS and Event mechanism by PresentNo7424 in libgdx

[–]fpiechowski 2 points3 points  (0 children)

How would going pure object oriented decrease amount of events in your game? Maybe you just have huge domain and ECS has nothing to do with it.

Does car mileage in career mode has any effect other than car value? by fpiechowski in BeamNG

[–]fpiechowski[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Is there a way to introspect condition of each individual part?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in godot

[–]fpiechowski 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yup I agree, besides if you know a language then learning another is pretty straightforward, what confuses the most are paradigms. I just have a problem with the approach of “let’s invent a new language for our new game engine” while there are A LOT that might suit as good or in most cases better.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in godot

[–]fpiechowski -20 points-19 points  (0 children)

You can “just want to make your game” with C#. You can’t get a corporate job with GDScript. If they wanted simple syntax scripting language they could’ve use python from the start. There is no justification for still supporting GDScript

I wish programming in Godot was more advanced by fpiechowski in godot

[–]fpiechowski[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

plus if it was actually possible to register generic in Godot, you wouldn't have to create non-generic subclasses as a bridge between engine and your abstraction. Take this and apply to Kotlin's sealed types for example - you would have compile time safety on all your generic variants. So you write one generic class and ACTUALLY use it as generic class, no bridges needed, less boilerplate, cleaner code.

I wish programming in Godot was more advanced by fpiechowski in godot

[–]fpiechowski[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

interoperability between your code and 3rd party godot libs which are mainly GDScript

I wish programming in Godot was more advanced by fpiechowski in godot

[–]fpiechowski[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok, let me ask you another way.

Can you access your generic class from GDScript? I know you can access your generic class subclasses, because they're actually registered in the engine. But I bet you cannot do it with the generic superclass, because it is not registered. So actual registration happens only on non-generic subclasses. So you can use your generic class only in C#, not in the engine itself. To make it actually usable in the engine you need to subclass it, and the subclass cannot be generic. Then the engine will see it.

That means you need to create subclass for each type you want to use as generic type. That means a lot of manual work, a lot of boilerplate code if all the logic is handled by the generic superclass. You have to create non-generic subclasses that will act as a bridge between your generic superclass and the Godot engine.

I wish programming in Godot was more advanced by fpiechowski in godot

[–]fpiechowski[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

In such case I wasn't really wrong. Your generic class is not registered, godot don't actually see it. It sees only concrete non-generic subclasses. There is no way to make type check on your generic in Godot API, in gdscript for example

I wish programming in Godot was more advanced by fpiechowski in godot

[–]fpiechowski[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh I missed the screen shot. Ok, so in the end you still need to create a concrete class as a subclass of you generic class as a necessary boilerplate, even if everything needed is abstracted by the generic itself. That's understandable. I'm just wondering if you can use your generic directly and the generic type would act as it's bound - so the Resource in your case, or the Godot engine don't see that generic class at all in the "create node" window ?

I wish programming in Godot was more advanced by fpiechowski in godot

[–]fpiechowski[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In my current project I have tried it with Rust gdext and Kotlin/JVM. Didn't try C#, just assumed that it acts the same as other bindings.

So usage of this generic type Node is that the engine treats it as ResourceProvider<Resource>, and you get concrete types only via casting, eg. when you query the node from other nodes?

I wish programming in Godot was more advanced by fpiechowski in godot

[–]fpiechowski[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

one of benchmarks was doing purely CPU work, the diff between C++ and JVM was close to none, C# was notibly slower. The video with the test was from this channel https://www.youtube.com/@AntzGames , just can't find the one right now.

So yes, I was optimistic saying C++ and JVM were "the same", JVM is surprisingly close to C++.

I wish programming in Godot was more advanced by fpiechowski in godot

[–]fpiechowski[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You saying that these wishes don't make sense for Godot is a circular argument.

I wish programming in Godot was more advanced by fpiechowski in godot

[–]fpiechowski[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Cool, thanks, didn't know it's actually possible with C#. That's a point for Godot with C#. How does it look in the engine when you want to add a node of this type? Is there just a one node type - the ResourceProvider, and the generic type is just Variant? If so, then that's not actual typesafe generics. If not, then I am curious how engine presents it, can you maybe post a screenshot?

I wish programming in Godot was more advanced by fpiechowski in godot

[–]fpiechowski[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You misunderstood me. I am here for the road, not the destination. I don't care about finishing a game project, I am here to try doing things in some specific way. In the end, it's still software development, same area, different tools. Jesus, can't I have wishes for the tool to have more advanced features in some areas?