News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Arma 3 – An analysis of recent multithreading improvement... by dustbunny on Friday June 20, 2025 @06:26PM (#44332692)
Another model may be that all actors read from frame N-1 and write to frame N. Then there's not many copies, just one.
Re:Arma 3 – An analysis of recent multithreading improvement... by akrotkov on Friday June 20, 2025 @07:49PM (#44333200)
Two, surely? The previous one still being used and the new one being written.

(Note that this is how most rendering artifacts were fixed long ago - the on screen and the off screen buffers were swapped, so nobody would "see" in progress scenes)

Re:Arma 3 – An analysis of recent multithreading improvement... by Retric on Friday June 20, 2025 @08:20PM (#44333382)
1 copy + the original = 2 instances in memory.
Re:Arma 3 – An analysis of recent multithreading improvement... by o11c on Friday June 20, 2025 @08:19PM (#44333378)
That's fine if actors are not doing much (e.g. just pathfinding and shooting), but is likely to fall apart long before scripting becomes a thing, since there are a lot of tasks where different actors do want to mutate the same object.
Re:Arma 3 – An analysis of recent multithreading improvement... by Retric on Friday June 20, 2025 @08:22PM (#44333399)
This is AI, having multiple actors plan to gather the same resource etc isn’t necessarily a flaw. It does however result in meaningful game design decisions getting tided up in how the game engine is designed.
Re:Arma 3 – An analysis of recent multithreading improvement... by dustbunny on Friday June 20, 2025 @10:24PM (#44333988)
This is a great example. It's probably pretty insignificant from a players perspective in most contexts. And you could most certainly design some acceleration structures to specifically handle AI convergence specific to your use case.
Re:Arma 3 – An analysis of recent multithreading improvement... by dustbunny on Friday June 20, 2025 @10:21PM (#44333968)
Can you share an example where this model falls apart?