On Tuesday, 14 October 2014 at 20:41:25 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
On 09/30/2014 04:48 AM, Szymon Gatner wrote:
On Monday, 29 September 2014 at 20:15:06 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
On Monday, 29 September 2014 at 10:00:27 UTC, Szymon Gatner
wrote:
Is that all it would take? Do you also need a GC-free standard
library, which seems to be the need of all the others saying
"do this
and I'll switch from C++"? Are the tools good enough?
Considered how many games (and I don't mean indie anymore, but
for
example Blizzard's Heartstone) are now created in Unity which
uses not
only GC but runs in Mono I am very skeptical of anybody
claiming GC is a
no-go for games.
The whole "Unity3D == Mono" thing is a somewhat inaccurate
misconception.
Unity3D's engine (ie, the real workhorse of any Unity3D game)
is written in plain old native C++. So not *necessarily* GC
(though they might still use one internally, I wouldn't know).
Only the game-specific scripts (and I *think* the Unity3D
Editor) actually run on Mono. And even then, the game scripts
*are* able to call into C-linkage stuff, which *is*
occasionally done to work around performance issues within game
scripts.
Also, I imagine Mono's GC is probably quite a bit better than
D's currently is.
All good points. Still, my point was that GC does not mean
language is automatically excluded from gamedev.
