Incase it doesn’t show up:

  • Doom4535@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 days ago

    Rust’s cargo is great, I’d say it would be best to make the switch sooner rather than later once your code base is established. The build system and tooling alone is a great reason to switch

    • ⸻ Ban DHMO 🇦🇺 ⸻@aussie.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      17 days ago

      What sucks is I’ve been working on this hobby project for nearly 4 years now. It started in C#, moved to C, now C++. It’s at the stage where a lot of basic functionality has been implemented, with the largest component, the Vulkan based renderer being maybe 1/4 implemented. The core game stuff is ECS based and flecs has a rust binding so migrating that will be easy. Renderer will just become even further from completion. I’m worried that there will be new problems that are maybe more inhibiting, but this is meant to be a fun project and build systems aren’t fun. It’s a difficult balance and I’m not the only person involved, the other person isn’t as convinced by cargo as they haven’t spent days working on the build system

      • CptBread@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        I’m a gameplay programmer who have worked with Unity and Unreal and I’ve experiment with Rust for gamedev(though only for hobby projects) and for regular code. My conclusions so far is that Rust sucks for gameplay code, for most other things it’s kinda nice.

        The biggest reason is that it’s much harder to write prototype code to test out an idea to see if it’s feasible and feels/looks good enough. I don’t want to be forced to fully plan out my code and deal with borrowing issues before I even have an idea of if this is a good path or not.

        I would say though that because you are using ECS stuff it is at least plausible to do in Rust but at least for my coding/development style it still isn’t a good fit.

        • rhombus@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          17 days ago

          The biggest reason is that it’s much harder to write prototype code to test out an idea to see if it’s feasible and feels/looks good enough. I don’t want to be forced to fully plan out my code and deal with borrowing issues before I even have an idea of if this is a good path or not.

          There are options for this with Rust. If you wanted to use pure Rust you could always use unsafe to do prototyping and then come back and refactor if you like it. Alternatively you could write bindings for C/C++ and do prototyping that way.

          Though, I will say that this process gets easier as you gain more experience with Rust memory management.

          • CptBread@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            17 days ago

            Not really. Unsafe doesn’t allow you to sidestep the borrow checker in a decent way. And even if you do it the Rust compiler assumes non aliasing and breaking that will give you loads of unexpected problems that you wouldn’t get in a language that assumes aliasing…

            Testing something that only has side effects to the local scope is probably not too hard but that isn’t the most common case for gameplay code in my experience…

            Going through another language basically has the same issues as unsafe except it’s worse in most ways as you’d need to keep up to date bindings all the time plus just the general hassle of doing it for something that could have been a 10 min prototype with most other setups…

            Now sure it’s possible that I would have better result after doing even more rust, especially with some feedback from someone who really knows it but that doesn’t really change anything in just general advice to people who is already working on something in C++ as they likely won’t have that kind of support either.