C++ Examples: Start with delta-time-only approach, before sub-step approach #157
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…proach In the text of this page, the reader is first introduced to the simple usage of "doPhysics"/"do_physics" with only a delta-time, and later introduced to the use of the sub-step parameters. And on the Python side, the examples reflect this: the first example of the use of "doPhysics" employs only the delta-time, while the second demonstrates sub-stepping. However, on the C++ side, the examples _only_ showed the use "do_physics" with sub-steps. While a close reading of the text might inform the reader that "do_physics" can be used without sub-stepping, and that sub-stepping can have performance impact, I fear that it would be quite easy for a reader to miss that and primarily see the examples. Hence I'm proposing a change that brings the C++ examples in line with the Python examples, by changing the first example that demonstrates "do_physics" to use only the delta-time.
|
Thanks! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In the text of this page, the reader is first introduced to the simple usage of "doPhysics"/"do_physics" with only a delta-time, and later introduced to the use of the sub-step parameters.
And on the Python side, the examples reflect this: the first example of the use of "doPhysics" employs only the delta-time, while the second demonstrates sub-stepping.
However, on the C++ side, the examples only showed the use "do_physics" with sub-steps.
While a close reading of the text might inform the reader that "do_physics" can be used without sub-stepping, and that sub-stepping can have performance impact, I fear that it would be quite easy for a reader to miss that and primarily see the examples.
Hence I'm proposing a change that brings the C++ examples in line with the Python examples, by changing the first example that demonstrates "do_physics" to use only the delta-time.