If you pay attention to the Unite 20 keynotes they are rewriting the not so performance critical components from C++ to C#.įinally the programming language compilers that come with the games consoles and OS SDKs also play a big role, and games developers tend to stick with what they get with the SDKs.
#Java lwjgl library code
Since IL2CPP got mature some of that C++ code is actually C# code. > As far as unity goes, all the heavy lifting in the game engine is still done in c/c++, c# is only used as a scripting language Java, C# and other type safe languages will never perform as good as C and C++.įact is that the majority of games I see on the stores aren't really AAA pushing the hardware limit, many of which have graphics and gameplay that could have been done with AMOS on an Amiga 500 and people would hardly notice. Now he are on, no serious game programmer would use anything other than C or C++. C++ adds too much bloat to make any game worthwhile playing. C, Pascal, Basic, Modula-2 lack the register control, memory layouts, instruction count, ability to self modifying code that Assembly allows for.įollowed by, no serious game programmer would use anything other than C or Pascal. Started with, no serious game programmer would use anything other than Assembly. I wrote my first games on a Timex 2068, since then I have witness and took part in many variations of this subject. They are also available in prototype form today for anyone that wants to play with them. Java is not yet there with value types, but in about 5 years time, Java 10 will be here with them. NET Native actually makes use of the same backend as Visual C++.
NET "good enough" and are now planning on changing that.Īlso. Microsoft recently did an interview where they admitted they only cared to make their native code compilers for. > It's why java/c# will never be as fast as c.Ĭ# has value types, added local references and reference returns on C# 7, and they will be adding more features from System C# (Midori) in the 7.1, 7.2 and 8.0 releases. As far as I understand LWJGL, it is not analogous to unity, it's not a game engine but a low level library to write a game engine with. It's why java/c# will never be as fast as c.Īs far as unity goes, all the heavy lifting in the game engine is still done in c/c++, c# is only used as a scripting language. There are similar issues if you want to actually use many of the features higher level languages come with. You can't declare an array of objects for example, only an array of references to objects, which isn't cache friendly. It's not just value types, it's reference indirection everywhere. > Yes, there are some performance issues regarding lack of value types, but not every single game is going to be the next Crysis. So do good c/c++ programmers, especially now that it's increasingly rarely taught in university and there is less fresh meat coming into the industry, yet games still get made. > Good Java programmers are better payed to write High Performance Trading systems, than working on games with their low salaries and crazy schedules. I can see LWJGL being useful, most particularly to help keep the infrastructure under the same language so that development and long-term maintenance are not a nightmare. This does require an experienced developer which understands how his code is impacting performance.įor example, avoiding ArrayLists or String objects and learning to use direct arrays or char objects.
#Java lwjgl library how to
In one side this is due to the JVM optimizations done automatically, the other side is having developers that understand how to write efficient code. Our internal performance testing is ranking Java on par with the C++ implementations of the same algorithm (performance typically flattens until a bottleneck is reached such as disk read speed) or completing the same tasks faster.
I've been writing high-performance Java code since years (chewing a few trillion computer files as fast as possible) and we certainly would have switched to anything else such as C++ if it was faster. I've noted this to be true in regards to salary.