Speed questions. - Cemetech | Forum

foamy3
1
Official Cemetech Fuel Transfer Engineer (Posts: 2193)

Speed questions.
17 Mar 2006 08:42:14 pm

Okay, I've been trying to make a 3rd person shooter in BASIC. I've got it working so the guy can move around and shoot, but it runs extremely slow. I realize that BASIC is slow anyway, but I think most of this is my fault.

I have the program, a sub routine to move,one to shoot, and one for the moving target you shoot at all called in the program's main loop. Does calling a sub routine slow your program more than just trying to put it all in the same program? And I have it so you can only shoot one bullet at a time due to the lack of variables. Is using a list slower than just using variables?

something1990
1
Supreme Commander of the Asgard Fleet (Posts: 1144)

17 Mar 2006 08:45:37 pm

I'm preety sure using lists is slower than using variables only. Subroutines might also contribute to the slowness. But remember it is BASIC. It can only get so quick...

Kllrnohj
☢ PH34R |\/|3 (Posts: 8196)
$☢ PH34R |\/|3$

Re: Speed questions.
17 Mar 2006 08:45:44 pm

foamy3 wrote:

Okay, I've been trying to make a 3rd person shooter in BASIC. I've got it working so the guy can move around and shoot, but it runs extremely slow. I realize that BASIC is slow anyway, but I think most of this is my fault.

I have the program, a sub routine to move,one to shoot, and one for the moving target you shoot at all called in the program's main loop. Does calling a sub routine slow your program more than just trying to put it all in the same program? And I have it so you can only shoot one bullet at a time. I think I could get more with a list instead of a variable, but would that slow it down even more?

by sub routines are just as fast as all in one program (they can be faster if it means you don't have to use a goto)

lists are slower than variables (by a noticeable amount)

dopeheaddude
Member (Posts: 131)

17 Mar 2006 08:49:01 pm
Last edited by dopeheaddude on 17 Mar 2006 08:50:02 pm; edited 1 time in total

Lists are slower indeed, but so little that it is normally not really making a difference. But, in my program, I found that using lists in programs that are constantly running is bad. Such as the program which controls movement; it is nearly always running, so using lists there would make it much slower (personal experience).

As for sub-programs, I do not believe it slows down generally, but certain things should be looked at:
Try to use Return as often as you can (meaning, do not call a program if you can just Return to it).
Avoid having 2 programs call each other over and over.

Keep in mind I'm an amatuer, so I hope someone better can correct me; but I think most of that is true! Razz

http://sc.cemetech.net

Load up the code and we can take a look at it!

foamy3
1
Official Cemetech Fuel Transfer Engineer (Posts: 2193)

17 Mar 2006 08:49:18 pm

I hardly have anything in the program and it is already almost unbearably slow. Should I just abandon it and learn asm?

Kllrnohj
☢ PH34R |\/|3 (Posts: 8196)
$☢ PH34R |\/|3$

17 Mar 2006 08:51:25 pm

dopeheaddude wrote:

Lists are slower indeed, but so little that it is normally not really making a difference. But, in my program, I found that using lists in programs that are constantly running is bad. Such as the program which controls movement; it is nearly always running, so using lists there would make it much slower (personal experience).

lists are drastically slower than a var

@Foamy: it'll always be slow, but if you paste the code(s), i'm sure people here can find optimizations you may be overlooking

dopeheaddude
Member (Posts: 131)

17 Mar 2006 08:52:13 pm

Errr...

KermMartian
Site Admin (Posts: 64056)

17 Mar 2006 08:52:19 pm

They are indeed much slower. I agree with DHD - post up some code and let's see whatcha got.

something1990
1
Supreme Commander of the Asgard Fleet (Posts: 1144)

17 Mar 2006 08:52:33 pm

dopeheaddude wrote:

Lists are slower indeed, but so little that it is normally not really making a difference. But, in my program, I found that using lists in programs that are constantly running is bad. Such as the program which controls movement; it is nearly always running, so using lists there would make it much slower (personal experience).

As for sub-programs, I do not believe it slows down generally, but certain things should be looked at:
Try to use Return as often as you can (meaning, do not call a program if you can just Return to it).
Avoid having 2 programs call each other over and over.

Keep in mind I'm an amatuer, so I hope someone better can correct me; but I think most of that is true! Razz

http://sc.cemetech.net

Load up the code and we can take a look at it!

You're an amateur? I don't know why but I thought you were more experienced... At least I know I'm not the only amateur around here.

KermMartian
Site Admin (Posts: 64056)

17 Mar 2006 08:53:48 pm

There are always noobs, and there are always noobs becoming less noobly. Smile

dopeheaddude
Member (Posts: 131)

17 Mar 2006 08:53:56 pm

Err, I'm amateur enough to be called amateur! Razz

Psst: Kerm, check your PMs; I'm dieing here!

KermMartian
Site Admin (Posts: 64056)

17 Mar 2006 08:55:54 pm

So anyway, this kind of game can definitely be made to run at a decent speed, provided that it's well-optimized.

dopeheaddude
Member (Posts: 131)

17 Mar 2006 08:56:35 pm

There's always room for improvement! Wink

jpez
Underboss of Cemetech (Posts: 2778)

17 Mar 2006 08:57:39 pm

dopeheaddude wrote:

There's always room for improvement! Wink

Improve this:
Code:

1-->A

something1990
1
Supreme Commander of the Asgard Fleet (Posts: 1144)

17 Mar 2006 08:58:34 pm

dopeheaddude wrote:

There's always room for improvement! Wink

Yep. Someone needs to hear that if you know what I mean.

foamy3
1
Official Cemetech Fuel Transfer Engineer (Posts: 2193)

17 Mar 2006 08:58:46 pm

BASIC Code wrote:

:ClrDraw
:AxesOff
:RecallPic Pic1
:1

W
:0

R
:0

J
:0

I
:0

:5

P
:1

Q
:9

A
:1

B
:A

N
:B

O
:Pause
:ClrDraw
:prgm

ZMOVE
:0

K
:Lbl A
:getKey

K
:If K=34
:A+2

N
:If K=25
:A-2

N
:If K=24
:B-2

O
:If K=26
:B+2

O
:
:If K=34 or K=24 or K=25 or K=26
:prgm

ZMOVE
:prgm

ZTARGET
:If K=21 and

=0
:1

:If

0
:prgm

ZSHOOT
:
:If K=105
:Then
:ClrHome
:Stop
:End
:
:
:
Generated by SourceCoder, Â© 2005 Cemetech

thetazmove

BASIC Code wrote:

:Pxl-Off(A,B+1
:Pxl-Off(A+1,B
:Pxl-Off(A+1,B+2
:Pxl-Off(A+2,B+1
:Pxl-Off(A+3,B+1
:Pxl-Off(A+4,B+1
:Pxl-Off(A+4,B
:Pxl-Off(A+4,B+2
:Pxl-Off(A+5,B+1
:Pxl-Off(A+6,B+1
:Pxl-Off(A+7,B
:Pxl-Off(A+7,B+2
:
:If W=1
:Then
:Pxl-Off(A+4,B+3
:Pxl-Off(A+3,B+3
:Pxl-Off(A+3,B+4
:End
:If W=2
:Then
:Pxl-Off(A+4,B+3
:Pxl-Off(A+3,B+3
:Pxl-Off(A+3,B+4
:Pxl-Off(A+3,B+5
:End
:
:
:If N>0 and N<55
:N

A
:If O>0 and O<75
:O

B
:
:Pxl-On(A,B+1
:Pxl-On(A+1,B
:Pxl-On(A+1,B+2
:Pxl-On(A+2,B+1
:Pxl-On(A+3,B+1
:Pxl-On(A+4,B
:Pxl-On(A+4,B+1
:Pxl-On(A+4,B+2
:Pxl-On(A+5,B+1
:Pxl-On(A+6,B+1
:Pxl-On(A+7,B
:Pxl-On(A+7,B+2
:
:If W=1
:Then
:Pxl-On(A+4,B+3
:Pxl-On(A+3,B+3
:Pxl-On(A+3,B+4
:End
:If W=2
:Then
:Pxl-On(A+4,B+3
:Pxl-On(A+3,B+3
:Pxl-On(A+3,B+4
:Pxl-On(A+3,B+5
Generated by SourceCoder, Â© 2005 Cemetech

thetazshoot

BASIC Code wrote:

:If

=1
:Then
:A+3

I
:B+6

J
:Pxl-On(I,J
:Pxl-On(I,J+1
:Pxl-On(I,J+2
:

+1

:End
:If

1
:Then
:Pxl-Off(I,J
:Pxl-Off(I,J+1
:Pxl-Off(I,J+2
:J+2

J
:
:If I

P and I

P+4
:Then
:If J+2=90 or J+1=90
:Then
:R+1

R
:If B

10 and W=2
:R+9

R
:Text(50,45,R
:End
:If R=5
:Then
:For(Z,1,62
:Pxl-On(Z,10
:End
:2

W
:End
:End
:
:
:Pxl-On(I,J
:Pxl-On(I,J+1
:Pxl-On(I,J+2
:

+1

:End
:If J

91
:Then
:0

:Pxl-Off(I,J
:Pxl-Off(I,J+1
:Pxl-Off(I,J+2
:End
:If

=20 and W=1
:Then
:0

thetaztarget

BASIC Code wrote:

:If P=3
:1

Q
:If P=55
:2

Q
:
:Pxl-Off(P,90
:Pxl-Off(P+1,90
:Pxl-Off(P+2,90
:Pxl-Off(P+3,90
:Pxl-Off(P+4,90
:
:If Q=1
Razz

+1

P
:If Q=2
Razz

-1

dopeheaddude
Member (Posts: 131)

17 Mar 2006 08:59:48 pm

Jonathan_Pezzino wrote:

dopeheaddude wrote:

There's always room for improvement! Wink

Improve this:
Code:

1-->A

That's not a game! Wink

foamy3
1
Official Cemetech Fuel Transfer Engineer (Posts: 2193)

17 Mar 2006 09:00:32 pm

Crap, I have to get offline for about an hour. I'll be back, though. I promise.

something1990
1
Supreme Commander of the Asgard Fleet (Posts: 1144)

17 Mar 2006 09:02:55 pm

These forums aren't moving anywhere. I'm preety sure it's better to just Delvar a variable instead of doing 0->Var.

Kllrnohj
☢ PH34R |\/|3 (Posts: 8196)
$☢ PH34R |\/|3$

17 Mar 2006 09:06:22 pm

something1990 wrote:

These forums aren't moving anywhere. I'm preety sure it's better to just Delvar a variable instead of doing 0->Var.

0->var is faster

delvar var takes less space

take your pick