On Oct 25, 2007, at 12:11 PM, Ian Mallett wrote:
On 10/25/07, Casey Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Oct 25, 2007, at 9:56 AM, Ian Mallett wrote:
surface.get_at() can be kinda slow, and typically sequence item
access is faster in python then a function call anyway.
Regardless, I wouldn't worry about it unless it helps makes the code
simpler or profiling shows you that using get_at() is slowing you
down too much.
It's slowing it down some, but the speed is fine. It's other people
running my program that I'm worried about. My computer can do 256
squared calls to surface.get_at() in about 30 seconds, but it is
pretty new.
yeah, it's always a good idea to have an old warhorse machine laying
around to test on. Either that or a relative that never upgrades ;^)
Even with a fast machine where performance is acceptable, profiling
can tell you if you are spending a disproportionate amount of time
doing certain things. And if you have capped the framerate, you can
experiment with inserting time.sleeps() in there to give away large
amounts of time per frame to simulate a slower environment. If you
don't cap the framerate, you can improve how smooth things are on
your fast machine by refactoring the slow bits. 50-60fps looks a lot
more polished than 30fps for instance, but it really depends on the
game and how much things are moving frame to frame.
-Casey
