Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ConcernedCoder 2185 days ago
...which is NOT high on the list of concerns for a game title, what you want instead is massive performance gains, so you can do more with less, and in the end produce a better experience than your competitor. -- function calls/indirection/making your code 'easy' to understand, all have a RUNTIME cost, and many small costs add up to a large cost, the reasoning is really that simple.
1 comments

I struggle to see how composing into functions adds a runtime cost when using modern compilers; as others have pointed out the compiler will inline it if the function is only used once.

This rationalization doesn’t make sense to me, especially for game engines which I assume are not limited to a release or 2 but are used to power multiple titles. If the software artifact is going to live for a long time, it’s probably worth the effort to make it easier to understand and test.

This! I'm not sure why we are discussing the runtime cost of a function with modern compilers.

Could this pattern result in code so slow the game won't work in development w/o high optimization flags, thus increasing compile time?

> the compiler will inline it if the function is only used once.

There may be other criteria, eg is the function likely to be called.