Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Post edit history

Mass Benchmarking Required

To display differences between versions, select one or more edits in the list using checkboxes and click "diff selected"
Post edit history
Date Editor Before After
1/16/2015 12:39:47 AMUSrankkaen before revert after revert
Before After
1 @Pxtl, 1 @Pxtl,
2 \n 2 \n
3 Maybe, but I'm not sure that justifies the potential costs. Building luajit is sometimes non-trivial, and last time I checked it has problems building on some platforms. There's a lot of good things to say about luajit, but not of them will trump measurements imo. With luajit, in my experience it's either a big win or a waste of time. The projects I've used it on had most of their expensive logic written in lua, so luajit integration was massively profitable ( calling into our C api became the bottleneck) . A full RTS engine is a different story, much of the expensive logic is likely in C++ ( could be exposing my ignorance here) , especially things like pathfinding and physics simulations. In my experience, these two are the most likely culprits, given that luajit integration has already been measured. 3 Maybe, but I'm not sure that justifies the potential costs. Building luajit is sometimes non-trivial, and last time I checked it has problems building on some platforms. There's a lot of good things to say about luajit, but none of them will trump measurements imo. With luajit, it's usually either a big win or a waste of time. The projects I've used it on had most of their expensive logic written in lua, so luajit integration was massively profitable ( calling into our C api became the bottleneck) . A full RTS engine is a different story, much of the expensive logic is likely in C++ ( could be exposing my ignorance here) , especially things like pathfinding and physics simulations. In my experience, these two are the most likely culprits, given that luajit integration has already been measured, and they wouldn't be affected by luajit in anyway.