Re: preventing c++ and stl code bloat?
- From: "qubit" <lauraeaves@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2011 18:16:44 -0600
Hey Ty, if you want help with bison I'd be glad to help. That's my old
stomping ground, so to speak.
If you want to take it off list I'm at lauraeaves@xxxxxxxxx, otherwise post
away.
Oh and happy new year by the way.
--le
----- Original Message -----
From: "Littlefield, Tyler" <tyler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2011 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: preventing c++ and stl code bloat?
OK, there's one major difference is the cross-platform stuff. My library
runs on Linux, and I haven't really had many thoughts about changing it,
so it just kind of stays on . I'll look at the others though. I
haven't seen a need for regex quite yet, but maybe when I get to more
advanced parsing I will. I've also been working on a POC for a parser I
want to write, which will have it's own language and compile down to
bitycode so that command parsing will be easier. So scripts as (lua for
me) as well as anyone using c++ can use this language, and each
registered command will just get a two-pass compilation; one to compile,
and a second (and possibly third) for optomization so that the commands
can be parsed out quicker. It'll end up looking something like: ($c
<obj> [to] <living>) I also plan to do groups, so you can do something
like: ($c <obj> [from] (#container in #container){3}|(#container)) which
will let you nest get x from box in backpack or something, with a
maximum of 3 matches. I think it looks messy now and I probably deviated
a bit, but I'm just starting to kind of throw that around, so we'll see
where it goes. I think it would speed up command parsing, which is going
to be a huge thing in the mud with multiple players. I don't see
bottlenecks yet, but I don't see why that can't be done to make things
quicker, either. I've kind of looked at boost::spirit or something
similar to write this out, as I think it would give me a lot more
flexability; possibly bison, though I have never been able to understand
how that works well enough to consider using it.
On 1/1/2011 1:40 PM, Ken Perry wrote:
> Ok one thing is my server is cross platform all the file system stuff is
> very useful. So is the regular expression library. I will also be using
> the any library but I have not had time and will not till the summer. If
> you're doing cross platform with c++ though that is what boost is really
> going to improve. For example I also use the thread library. One library
> I
> would really like to switch to is wave but the problem is I currently use
> bison and flex to create our compiler and switching that to wave grammar
> would be a nightmare. Before I did that I would just switch to a multi
> scripting language library that would support things like python, lua, and
> others. I do like our functional language though so that is one reason I
> have not done it. I have been thinking of doing a side by side where I
> support all those languages and my own but again I can't do that till
> after
> this summer probably.\
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Littlefield,
> Tyler
> Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2011 2:51 AM
> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: preventing c++ and stl code bloat?
>
> I am curious where you find boost useful? I've tried numerous times to
> look at it and play with it, but I haven't really seen anything I can
> use out of it. Maybe it's just lack of experience with the library, but
> things like serialization is done (though I want to use tinyxml), and
> I'm not seeing where the rest of the library could be useful, so I'm
> curious how you use it to help in mud development.
> On 1/1/2011 12:18 AM, Ken Perry wrote:
>> I have started using boost and stl more which is why the code base has
>> shrunk but the binary has not grown that much you have to understand stl
> is
>> mostly templates and compilers do a pretty good job now days if you are
>> already using a list for example you don't get a whole other code segment
> of
>> list if you use two. You pretty much should only get a data section if
> the
>> compiler is working right.
>>
>> Ken
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Littlefield,
>> Tyler
>> Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2011 1:51 AM
>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: preventing c++ and stl code bloat?
>>
>> How much do you make use of the stl? I use it everywhere. From holding
>> options to holding lists of players, rooms, zones, sockets, etc. I could
>> use libraries (and may at some point, possibly for some other stuff),
>> but only if I really need to worry about code size. Right now I was just
>> getting kind of worried that the use of the stl is going to cause
>> headaches and problems at some point sooner or later.
>> On 12/31/2010 11:38 PM, Ken Perry wrote:
>>> I have 67,000 lines and I am at 11 mb debug and 900kb stripped.
>>>
>>> I was not much bigger when I was at 100,000 lines of code. I have
>>> shrunk
>> it
>>> by using libraries but the binary comes out about the same.
>>>
>>> ken
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Littlefield,
>>> Tyler
>>> Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2011 1:16 AM
>>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: preventing c++ and stl code bloat?
>>>
>>> Hello all,
>>> I've been doing some googling, and I have a quick question. With my mud
>>> engine nearing 10k lines of code, I'm starting to get worried about the
>>> fact that with debugging I'm looking at a 3.5m executable. without
>>> debugging symbols, we're at about 600 kb. Now, while this isn't a whole
>>> lot, where will I be in twice the amount of code? three times? 5 times?
>>> I believe a huge problem is the STL, I'm just not really sure how to cut
>>> down on the massive amount of code that was apparently generated as part
>>> of my lists and vectors that I use. Ideas here would be welcome. I was
>>> told (or read somewhere) that game engines just write their own types,
>>> which makes sense, but I see multiple problems with this. 1) you're
>>> basically defeating the purpose of templates just to rewrite code, and
>>> each new type you rewrite to handle a list of sockets, a list of
>>> players, etc etc may or may not be more or less bloated and have bugs.
>>>
>>> As always, you can grab the code from:
>>> svn://tds-solutions.net/branches/unstable/aspen if you care to peek at
>>> it. It's still in early development phases, though it's coming along
>>> quite nicely every day I add to it, so be ware lack of documentation in
>>> some places, bad code, bugs, etc etc.
>>>
>
--
Thanks,
Ty
__________
View the list's information and change your settings at
//www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
__________
View the list's information and change your settings at
//www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
Other related posts:
