Re: Hooks
Brandon Van Every <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.games.devel.sweng |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Richard Fabian <[email protected]> wrote: > OO C++ might be nicer to look at than data oriented C++ (if it's done right) > but it seems that as it so seldom is done right, can't we just move to a > paradigm that newbies will be able to understand enough to not cause us > massive grief later on when we pick up the pieces? Why is "avoiding massive grief later" a commercial goal? The guys that were doing things before, they shipped, they got paid, they moved on to something else. The company wanted to ship, so it's not like they cheated the company. Just about every American company out there plans for the next Quarter only, not some long term business cycle. YMMV in other countries. Game projects have to survive, and a lot of game code is disposable from project to project. Reuse is overrated and shouldn't be over-engineered. Sure you can and should keep one eye on the future, but you've always gotta keep two eyes on the present, or your project tanks. I'm saying, you shouldn't approach the software engineering from a position of prejudice where crap isn't allowed to happen and is viewed as "wrong" development. Crap *is* going to happen, and programmers are going to get paid to clean up messes later, long after the fact. That's reality. If you don't like that kind of job, and are being subjected to too much of it at a given studio, perhaps you should move on / move up? It is much better to make new messes for other people to clean up, rather than spend your time head scratching and cleaning up old messes, unless you're getting paid an absurd amount of money to do the latter. My $0.02 is that C++ greatly exacerbates these problems. Moving to a garbage collected language helps somewhat. Blind adherence to OO still creates problems however. Maybe in time, as programmers become more accustomed to non-OO paradigms, code will gradually become more maintainable. I'm thinking particularly in terms of metaprogramming, which seems apropos to an "I wanna hook into all of my variables" sentiment. Why torture yourself with trying to solve that kind of problem in C++? While we're waiting for the future, though, I think it's important to recognize when our problems mainly stem from our choice of tools, or job, or team members, or segment of industry, or other things we can't simply code our way out of. You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Cheers, Brandon Van Every _______________________________________________ Sweng-Gamedev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.midnightryder.com/listinfo.cgi/sweng-gamedev-midnightryder.com