User talk:Hvengel: Difference between revisions

: Emilian: while I agree that the Extra-500 is really slow for me as well, how well it performs is not relevant to this discussion. The Nasal used there is more comparable to "500+600+700+... lines of Nasal code adding up" than "5+5+5+... lines of Nasal code adding up" – because 5 lines of Nasal code takes up no time at all (unless it calls expensive functions and/or uses recursion and/or loops, which the Extra-500 certainly uses some of). The Extra-500 is really complex (as far as I understand it) and is subject to different issues, issues which don't affect small scripts (i.e. 5-liners). Some of the lack of efficiency is not even Nasal code, it's hard coded (e.g. the props.Node interface, which doesn't use cppbind and thus can create unnecessary temporary GC-able objects if used incorrectly). Some of it is the lack of efficiency in the Extra-500's code versus what being accomplished – i.e. it could be much simpler in places (and actually use MapStructure). Some of it is the positioned queries – those are not microscopic yet, but probably will be soon. Et cetera. There's different ways we could prove it's inefficient code. Nasal itself, however, is very efficient from what I've seen and simple animations are not time-wasters at all. Even 100 lines of simple Nasal animations should execute in under ~2-4ms, I would guess, on reasonably modern hardware if it doesn't use certain constructs (e.g. props.globals.getNode("").setValue/getValue, where the node isn't cached, see [http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=22155#p201370], or other GC nightmares). Even GC'ing is extremely fast on my computer :-). [[User:Philosopher|—Philosopher]] ([[User talk:Philosopher|talk]]) 13:55, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

== Ubershader Issues ==