So if you spend any time viewing / answering questions over on Stack Overflow under the C++ tag, you will quickly notice that just about everybody uses the boost library; some would even say that if you aren't using it, you're not writing "real' C++ (I disagree, but that's not the point).
But then there is the game industry, which is well known for using C++ and not using boost. I can't help but wonder why that is. I don't care to use boost because I write games (now) as a hobby, and part of that hobby is implementing what I need when I am able to and using off-the-shelf libraries when I can't. But that is just me.
Why don't game developers, in general, use the boost library? Is it performance or memory concerns? Style? Something Else?
I was about to ask this on stack overflow, but I figured the question is better asked here.
I realize I can't speak for all game programmers and I haven't seen all game projects, so I can't say game developers never use boost; this is simply my experience.
Allow me to edit my question to also ask, if you do use boost, why did you choose to use it?
Who says they don't use boost? I've known one or two C++ engines that have used boost. I've never directly worked with them; but, that's mostly 'cause my experience lies in Unreal.
As for reasons I've encountered for not using boost, and these are subjective:
It basically boils down to: a general solution isn't always the "right fit."
I'm sure someone who's actually worked with the library could comment better.
Same thing is (was?) being said for the "more standard" STL. This article talks about EASTL, an in-house rewrite of (parts of) STL by Electronic Arts to accomodate the needs of game development which are rather different than those of "more generic" application development.
So, maybe, someone somewhere is re-writing (parts of) boost to accomodate their needs in game development!
Some developers do, some developers don't (in games and elsewhere). It depends on what the needs/requirements of those developers are, and what existing technology they have to leverage.
C++'s standard library is often given the same treatment, and people often wonder the same thing you are wondering about it, too. Most of the reasons are similar, for example:
A developer may already have an in-house library of functionality that provides the same services that the standard library or Boost provides. Such in-house libraries were often written long ago, when implementation support for the standard library was weak and Boost was basically non-existent, so they more-or-less had to be written. In this scenario, it's usually not really worth transitioning away from the in-house functionality -- it would be a major porting effort that would destabilize a lot of code, and provide almost no benefit.
A developer may be working on platforms where compiler support for the advanced C++ techniques leveraged by Boost are not well supported, such that the Boost code doesn't compile at all or performs quite poorly. This applies to the standard library as well, although much less so these days.
Boost and the language's standard library are general purpose, and while that is fine and good for most applications, sometimes a developer has specific needs that can be better addressed by more specialized containers.
I think the above are two reasonable reasons, although there are certainly others. You have to be careful though because many reasons for avoiding Boost, the standard libraries, or whatever boil down to "not invented here" syndrome, which can be an indication that the reason isn't very well grounded in practical realities.
Also remember that the needs of a large-ish studio are usually very different from the needs of an individual developer. For example, an individual developer probably has less legacy code floating around to maintain and so perhaps porting from a home-grown version of the Boost or standard library functionality will not be as big of a time sink and will save that developer from having to maintain that code as extensively in the future -- thus invalidating my first bullet point.
In the end, it is all about evaluating your requirements and time investiture against your desired goal and determining which option meets your needs the best. Developers who aren't using Boost or the standard library have usually done so and reached that conclusion -- perhaps you will too, and perhaps not.
In our case (not games), we have a great reason for not using boost (nor std): We have a lot of code that dates back a decade. According to the seniors, std and boost were either incomplete, full of bugs or just too slow for the high-performance things we require. So some base classes were implemented, using the same concepts (such as iterators) and often optimized for our algorithms. Nowadays, all three libraries (ours, std and boost) are very similar.
But do we want to port over all our code? Not really. I assume many other companies face the same dilemma. Either rewrite a lot of tested and working code or not use std/boost.
We used a bit of Boost back at our old workplace. The main reasons for mostly avoiding it and limiting its use were:
that. All this seems well and good, except I have one question, why not linked lists rather than arrays? Sure, if you had to make your own linked list class, I would be on board, but in c++ anyway, assuming...I was recently listen to a talk that Jonathan Blow gave, you can find it here. In the talk, he was talking about what data structures he (and he seemed to imply many others) use, and why. Which is to say that he simply used arrays to store data, and use the naive approach to find data in it, meaning iterate through the array until you found what you wanted, assuming it wasn't in a performance
well... I'm building the animation system of my game engine (the skeletal and skinned animation stuff), and I came to a point where I added so much functionality in the frame and node structures... for my needs. Ah and I forgot to mention that nodes can have hierarchy, but this is not a problem if the frame data is reduced. The structure instances don't get duplicated unless any value changes. When... in particular or contains any game attributes, it's just keyframed animation data and some IDs for them and to reference API objects. I use objects such as CFrame to hold pointers to frame data
sort of designs other people used to overcome them, or would use. For a little background, I started working on it in my free time last summer. I was initially making the game in C#, but about 3 months... to worry about this since it isn't an issue there. Moving to C++, this has become a fairly major problem and made me think I may have designed things incorrectly. I can't really imagine how to decouple... related to the graphics library I'm using, but is more of a conceptual thing. In C#, I coupled graphics in with alot of my classes which i know is a terrible idea. Wanting to do it decoupled
to be moved then so be it), but i felt it would fit here just a bit, since its a game-dev type question. Anyways, My compiler is MinGW that uses the IDE Code::Blocks. also the operating system that im using on both computers are windows Vista 32 bit. Now if anyone would know why this would happen then please do tell(but my guess is that maybe the graphics card is not compatible) Here... errors on request through comment). But as of now the main problem is when i render my model(it is a plane with simple, unblended pixelated texture), it looks like this on my Laptop(Left Image
I'm creating an FPS game. I'm writing my own game engine. So far all the backend stuff is going great. I'd like to support md2 as the native file format for 3D Objects, but I also want to use skeletal meshes. Does anyone know if the md2 file format supports skeletal meshes? In-case you need to know, I'm going to use blender as my Mesh creation tool and C++ as my programming language... Thanks For got to mention, the engine is based on OpenGL... Alright, for anyone who is reading this, I just found the Doom 3 md5 specifications (http://tfc.duke.free.fr/coding/md5-specs-en.html). It gives
I'm new to Game programmming and SDL, and I have been following Lazyfoo's SDL tutorials. My question is related to time based motion and frame rate based motion, basically which is better or appropriate depending on situations?. Could you give me an example where each of these methods are used?. Another question I have is that, in lazyfoo's two Motion tutorials (FPS based and time based... position when you compare the two programs. As beginner which method should I stick to?(all I want is smooth animations).
not seem to have joystick input support, which would require that SDL or some other library also be used. So my question can be summed up as this: What is the best way to get SVG and joystick...I'm looking into building a cross-platform opensource 2D RPG style game engine for ChaiScript. I want to be able to do all of the graphics with SVG and need joystick input. I also need the libraries I use to be opensource and compatible with the BSD license. I'm familiar with allegro, ClanLib, and SDL. As far as I can tell, none of these libraries have built in or obvious integration for SVG
costs with this library in this context. Just to be more clear about geometrical shapes I'm using : sectors are basically convex polygons, and portals are segments that lies on sector's edge. Micropather exposes a pure virtual Graph class that you must inherate and overrides 3 functions. I understand how pathfinding works, so there's no problem in overriding those functions. Right now, my implementation give me results, i.e I'm able to find a path in my map, but I'm not sure I'm using an optimal solution. For the AdjacentCost method : I just take the distance between sector's centers
I have the book iPhone 3D Programming; this book taught be a lot about overall c++ iPhone application architecture and iPhone OpenGL ES. But a lot of the book is obviously about 3D, so most of the book wasn't that useful to me. I also have Game Coding Complete 3rd Edition; this book taught me a lot about game engine architecture but the emphasis is on c++ windows desktop game programming. I am looking for c++ 2D game engine architecture books. I'm not looking to use any frameworks; I want something more geared towards 2d c++ game engine architecture. Any suggestions? Thanks.