Josh

I uploaded my current version here: http://www.leadwerks.com/post/codewerks.rar The example program is myprog.txt. You can use the included Code Editor, or just run the .bat file. Here is my current test program: Structure Vec3 Field x:Float Field y:Float Field z:Float Method Normalize:Vec3() Local v:Vec3 Local m:Float m=Sqrt( Self.x*Self.x + Self.y*Self.y + Self.z*Self.z ) v.x = Self.x / m v.y = Self.y / m v.z = Self.z / m Return v EndMethod Method Length:Float() Return Sqrt( Self.x*Self.x + Self.y*Self.y + Self.z*Self.z ) EndMethod Method Dot:Float( v:Vec3 ) Return Self.x*v.x + Self.y*v.y + Self.z*v.z EndMethod Method ToString:String() Return Self.x+", "+Self.y+", "+Self.z EndMethod Method Add:Vec3(v:Vec3) v.x=v.x+Self.x v.y=v.y+Self.y v.z=v.z+Self.z Return v EndMethod Method Subtract:Vec3(v:Vec3) v.x=Self.x-v.x v.y=Self.y-v.y v.z=Self.z-v.z Return v EndMethod Method Add:Vec3(f:Float) Local v:Vec3 v.x=Self.x+f v.y=Self.y+f v.z=Self.z+f Return v EndMethod EndStructure Class Entity Field position:Vec3 Field rotation:Vec3 Field scale:Vec3 Field parent:Entity EndClass Local a:Vec3 Local b:Vec3 a.x=3 b=a.Normalize() Print a Print b 'Produce divide by zero error: 'Local n:Int 'n=n/0

What kind of compile times should I realistically expect in optimum conditions?

Is this something that gets set per-file? I looked at the options and there's one setting to use a pch and another to create one...I am a bit confused, and Google did not help.

Do you have a file that can produce this error?

Is there anything I can do to improve the performance of the visual studio compiler? If I only change the main code file, it takes 20-30 seconds to compile a small project. GCC compiles a similar project in less than a second.

It's a whole new engine, although it uses a lot of existing code.

I am not translating BlitzMax to anything, but chunks of BMX code can be converted with minimal changes.

The code isn't BlitzMax, and object handling works a lot differently.

This isn't about forcing anyone to give up C++. Like I said, I could implement this and you wouldn't even know it.

The example I posted wasn't very extreme, but I believe the number of characters my language uses will be somewhere around 20% of what C++ requires. I do understand C++. I have to in order to understand how to create efficient code. The problem is C++ involves a large amount of tedious unnecessary typing. For a large team where manpower is unlimited, this doesn't really matter. For a small team, it is very important. Also, if I start using a lot of shorthand in C++, a company that licenses the source from me won't be too happy. So me using this is a foregone conclusion. I am just wondering if anyone else would find this useful.

Production of Leadwerks 3 begins today!

You can read about my C++ production process here: http://leadwerks.com/werkspace/index.php?/blog/1/entry-496-friday-the-13th/ This thread is for discussion of your thoughts about a new programming language that gets compiled through C++ code.

Not sure if I should lock, delete, or just let this one ride out for comedic value.

I think they did something similar in the STALKER games. If you poke around the files, there are some textures with a bunch of billboard images merged onto them.

I'd rather not share the details. It may be possible to implement billboarding for static meshes, but the potential savings are uncertain and it's not a high priority.

I like recast.

People might want more than just cow AI.

Meshes already use batching. The vegetation LOD system uses another method that doesn't work well with dynamic objects.

Under a certain threshold, there's not really any difference between rendering 2 or 200 triangles. The cost of starting and stopping that operation becomes more significant than the actual draw time itself.

Yes, an automated system is being implemented.

The polycount seems excessive to me. That could mean quads, in which case it would be over 100,000 triangles.

Probably not.

Version 3 will have a pathfinding system built-in for AI.

It's complicated, but the way the Windows controls system is designed, it doesn't allow tab cycling up hierarchies...the subcontrols are laid out in panels with children, to control the way they resize. So I actually just happened to be dealing with this problem, and I am leaning towards removing the little up-down arrows for float values. That will allow you to type in one value, then tab to the next control.

Does anyone use the little arrows next to the text fields in the vector controls? I could just get rid of them.