Minetest logo

IRC log for #minetest-dev, 2015-08-28

| Channels | #minetest-dev index | Today | | Google Search | Plaintext

All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
00:31 CraigyDavi joined #minetest-dev
01:08 Player_2 joined #minetest-dev
01:28 BrandonReese joined #minetest-dev
01:31 Batman joined #minetest-dev
01:58 est31 joined #minetest-dev
02:00 est31 I have raised this topic before, but perhaps somebody hasn't heard.
02:00 est31 anybody against accepting Calinou's entry for the website?
02:01 est31 the only Issue I could see this far is its big download size
02:04 est31 But there are ways to make it smaller, perhaps I'll send PRs
02:07 BrandonReese I think it was mentioned on the forums but the size of the home page is because it's loading the full size images in the gallery
02:08 BrandonReese All the other pages seem to be less than 600k
02:12 est31 thats already too large
02:13 BrandonReese Oh really?
02:13 BrandonReese What size is optimal?
02:13 est31 It should be < 100 KB
02:22 y considering 600k takes 40 seconds to load over 2g here
02:24 Player-2 joined #minetest-dev
02:30 Hijiri joined #minetest-dev
02:30 Lunatrius` joined #minetest-dev
02:37 Lunatrius joined #minetest-dev
02:52 Lunatrius joined #minetest-dev
03:05 Robby joined #minetest-dev
04:56 chchjesus joined #minetest-dev
05:43 Hunterz joined #minetest-dev
06:06 leat1 joined #minetest-dev
06:08 emptty joined #minetest-dev
06:25 nrzkt joined #minetest-dev
07:03 blaze joined #minetest-dev
07:03 blaze joined #minetest-dev
07:03 Darcidride joined #minetest-dev
07:06 cd2 joined #minetest-dev
07:13 Siva joined #minetest-dev
07:17 julienrat joined #minetest-dev
07:17 julienrat left #minetest-dev
07:31 nrzkt joined #minetest-dev
07:33 nore joined #minetest-dev
07:52 Siva_AndroIRC joined #minetest-dev
08:00 Yepoleb_ joined #minetest-dev
08:22 rubenwardy joined #minetest-dev
08:31 Siva_Machina joined #minetest-dev
08:40 Siva joined #minetest-dev
08:41 Amaz joined #minetest-dev
08:45 Siva joined #minetest-dev
08:50 ElectronLibre joined #minetest-dev
08:52 Lunatrius joined #minetest-dev
09:44 Lunatrius` joined #minetest-dev
09:58 FR^2 joined #minetest-dev
10:01 T4im joined #minetest-dev
10:04 Gael-de-Sailly joined #minetest-dev
10:26 kahrl is the glitching through blocks with using the sneak glitch really fixed? (#3045 / #3089)
10:26 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/3089 -- Fix glitching through block while sneak glitching by BlockMen
10:27 kahrl I built this simple structure: https://imgrush.com/akOkveH1Hj-E.png
10:27 kahrl and stood inside it: https://imgrush.com/2XxfmrSWDG9o.png
10:28 kahrl if I then press sneak + jump, I glitch through the ceiling
10:28 kahrl see also https://forum.minetest.net/v​iewtopic.php?f=6&amp;t=13123
10:29 Robby joined #minetest-dev
10:29 FR^2 joined #minetest-dev
10:29 Hunterz joined #minetest-dev
10:29 Sketch2 joined #minetest-dev
10:30 exoplanet joined #minetest-dev
10:30 VanessaE joined #minetest-dev
10:32 VanessaE joined #minetest-dev
10:34 kahrl reopened 3045.
10:34 exoplanet joined #minetest-dev
10:50 Calinou joined #minetest-dev
11:07 nanepiwo is play store updated?
11:07 kilbith joined #minetest-dev
11:20 CraigyDavi joined #minetest-dev
11:25 nrzkt nanepiwo: not, not atm because i need to check a thing with est31
11:26 nrzkt apk is built and signed but not uploaded yet
11:56 Zeitgeist_ joined #minetest-dev
12:07 nore joined #minetest-dev
12:17 H-H-H joined #minetest-dev
12:19 Lunatrius joined #minetest-dev
12:40 julienrat joined #minetest-dev
12:47 Gael-de-Sailly joined #minetest-dev
12:58 leat1 joined #minetest-dev
13:03 Megaf joined #minetest-dev
13:17 Lunatrius joined #minetest-dev
13:19 troller joined #minetest-dev
13:20 julienrat joined #minetest-dev
13:24 julienrat left #minetest-dev
13:27 fireblade joined #minetest-dev
13:28 leat1 joined #minetest-dev
13:52 Siva joined #minetest-dev
14:02 Lunatrius` joined #minetest-dev
14:05 Samson1 joined #minetest-dev
14:08 Amaz joined #minetest-dev
14:10 Lunatrius joined #minetest-dev
14:11 Player_2 joined #minetest-dev
14:14 Hunterz joined #minetest-dev
14:18 leat1 joined #minetest-dev
14:28 leat1 joined #minetest-dev
14:30 sfan5 https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pull/3116
14:30 sfan5 the fucl
14:30 sfan5 why is this needed?
14:33 sfan5 it just breaks a lot of pull requests
14:33 sfan5 i thought we generally dont accept dumb stylistic changed like this
14:46 est31 joined #minetest-dev
14:49 est31 sfan5, its not just style
14:50 est31 i++ copies the iterator, and discards the copy
14:50 est31 ++i doesnt copy it
14:50 est31 therefore ++i should be used instead
14:50 est31 the copy is only a problem for iterators, etc. "simple" types like integers arent affected by this
14:56 CraigyDavi joined #minetest-dev
14:59 kahrl how would a single-line conflict that can be easily rebased "break" a pull request?
15:00 est31 I guess sfan5 argues that it needs manual intervention
15:00 kahrl oh well
15:01 Gael-de-Sailly minor change about ore generation : https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pull/3119
15:01 est31 nrzkt, your apk works
15:06 sfan5 est why do you always leave
15:06 sfan5 anyway
15:07 sfan5 are you sure that compilers are that dumb?
15:07 sfan5 i doubt the compiler will copy the iterator and throw the copy away
15:12 Calinou joined #minetest-dev
15:13 Samson22 joined #minetest-dev
15:14 H-H-H joined #minetest-dev
15:17 hmmmm joined #minetest-dev
15:24 domtron joined #minetest-dev
15:30 leat1 joined #minetest-dev
15:30 nrzkt ~tell est31: then i upload to playstore ?
15:30 ShadowBot nrzkt: O.K.
15:39 leat1 joined #minetest-dev
15:58 Gael-de-Sailly joined #minetest-dev
16:38 emptty joined #minetest-dev
16:51 Krock joined #minetest-dev
16:56 Siva joined #minetest-dev
17:42 zupoman joined #minetest-dev
17:42 zupoman joined #minetest-dev
17:48 nrzkt joined #minetest-dev
18:20 leat1 joined #minetest-dev
18:35 neoascetic joined #minetest-dev
18:36 nore joined #minetest-dev
18:36 neoascetic tell ShadowNinja #3117 is OK now
18:36 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/3117 -- Fixes building on OSX caused by e4bff8b (refs #2613) by neoascetic
18:44 est31 joined #minetest-dev
18:45 est31 <sfan5> est why do you always leave <---- because I go afk, and turn my computer off.
18:45 est31 nrzkt, btw I don't seem to get your messages
18:46 est31 but yeah, I guess you can upload it
18:46 sfan5 nrzkt: i think you need to omit the :
18:46 sfan5 ~tell est31 like this
18:46 ShadowBot sfan5: O.K.
18:46 sfan5 did that work?
18:47 est31 joined #minetest-dev
18:47 est31 -ShadowBot- Sent just now: <sfan5> like this
18:47 est31 yes
18:47 sfan5 ok
18:47 est31 but I have to leave and join again
18:47 est31 anyway
18:48 est31 I dont think compilers optimize that away
18:48 est31 the copy is an opaque method call
18:48 sfan5 why would they differ between (void) i++ and (void) ++i
18:48 est31 the copy can have side effects
18:48 sfan5 such as?
18:49 est31 its just a completely normal method I guess
18:50 Gael-de-Sailly joined #minetest-dev
18:50 nrzkt est31: okay uploading it then
18:51 leat1 joined #minetest-dev
18:53 nrzkt notice: 493 devices will not be supported anymore with this version because we switch from armeabi to armeeabi-v7a
18:53 nrzkt armeabi-v7a*
18:53 est31 yeah ...
18:54 est31 but its claimed to be faster
18:54 nrzkt whereis the changelog ?
18:54 sfan5 not claimed
18:54 sfan5 armv7 is clearly faster than armv6
18:54 nrzkt i will add a link
18:54 nrzkt got it :)
18:55 est31 my i9100 is a 2011 model, and has armv7 as well
18:55 ElectronLibre joined #minetest-dev
18:56 nrzkt i hope nobody will have same crash as me on my Huawei Ascend from 2013...
18:56 est31 whats the logcat?
18:57 nrzkt i haven't it atm, will look at this a little bit more later :) i come here for publishing apk :) good evening
18:59 sfan5 est31: i just tested, my gcc (v5.2.0 x86_64 -O2) generates the exact same assembly code for this example with i++ and ++i http://sprunge.us/VBGg?cpp
19:01 leat1 joined #minetest-dev
19:01 ElectronLibre left #minetest-dev
19:01 sfan5 est31: v4.8.1 x86_64 -O2 MinGW too
19:01 sfan5 32-bit mingw too
19:03 sfan5 est31: is i++ vs ++i supposed to have any other advantages?
19:04 est31 sfan5, not that I know
19:04 sfan5 so the PR is complete bullshit
19:05 sfan5 i suggest adding a rule to the git guidelines not to merge any PR thats supposed to improve some performance without anyone actually proving that it does
19:06 est31 sfan5, I get a largely differing assembler output
19:06 est31 I did g++ -g -Wa,-alh  a.cpp  > pre.ass
19:07 sfan5 -Wa,-alh wat
19:07 est31 and then diff pre.ass post.ass
19:07 sfan5 g++ -O2 -S test.cpp -o - > thing.S
19:07 nrzkt est31: you forgot -O2
19:07 est31 -S didnt work for me
19:07 nrzkt in release process it's done, and gcc solve the problem itself
19:07 sfan5 then you should fix your gcc
19:09 est31 without -O2 there is a difference
19:09 sfan5 indeed
19:09 sfan5 and who cares about that
19:09 sfan5 we build minetest with -O2
19:09 est31 everybody who runs minetest in debug mode because they get std::bad_allow
19:09 est31 alloc*
19:09 est31 or other crashes
19:09 est31 to give us stacktraces
19:10 est31 isnt -g and -O conflicting?
19:10 sfan5 yes
19:10 est31 as in "either or"
19:10 sfan5 -g is debug
19:10 sfan5 i mean no
19:10 sfan5 CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE:STRING=-O3 -DNDEBUG
19:10 sfan5 we even use -O3
19:11 sfan5 debug is either -O0 or -O1 indeed
19:11 sfan5 woops no i customized that
19:11 est31 O1 seems to be enough
19:12 sfan5 set(CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_DEBUG "-g -O0 -Wall -Wabi ${WARNING_FLAGS} ${OTHER_FLAGS}")
19:12 sfan5 -O0 is slow anyway
19:12 sfan5 i suggest not trying to "optimize" for -O0
19:12 sfan5 tl;dr the whole change is still not necessary
19:13 est31 well, its completely non functional
19:13 sfan5 any sane person would use set(CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_SEMIDEBUG "-O1 -g -Wall -Wabi" CACHE STRING
19:13 sfan5 that one
19:14 sfan5 actually we could simply have changed the debug optimization
19:14 est31 I mean its something else to say "++i instead of i++" than to say "I add some face position cache because it removes some copies"
19:14 est31 sfan5, thats more intrusive than editing code
19:14 est31 at least in this case
19:14 sfan5 nope
19:15 sfan5 you rather edit 125 lines than 1?
19:15 est31 if its less intrusive yes
19:15 sfan5 how is making the debug build not damn slow intrusive?
19:16 est31 it can optimize e.g. assert checks away
19:16 est31 or it can change undefined behaviour
19:16 UnknownSentinel joined #minetest-dev
19:16 sfan5 wat
19:16 est31 and make valgrind crash
19:16 sfan5 assert checks are done unless you set NDEBUG
19:16 est31 who knows how valgrind behaves
19:17 sfan5 NDEBUG is not the same as the optimisation level
19:17 nrzkt est31: asserts are useful to fix bugs
19:17 nrzkt don't remove it.
19:17 est31 nrzkt, therefore they shouldnt be removed
19:18 est31 its far more risky to SET A WHOLE COMPILER FLAG than to make obvious optimisations yourself
19:19 sfan5 est31: "If you are planning to use Memcheck: [...] All other tools (as far as we know) are unaffected by optimisation level, and for profiling tools like Cachegrind it is better to compile your program at its normal optimisation level."
19:19 sfan5 tl;dr the -O level does not matter unless your using memcheck
19:19 sfan5 http://valgrind.org/docs/manua​l/manual-core.html#manual-core.started
19:20 est31 "So the best solution is to turn off optimisation altogether. "
19:21 sfan5 est31: "If you are planning to use memcheck: ..."
19:22 est31 sfan5, so why do you want to slow down memcheck, which is already slow?
19:22 sfan5 wat
19:22 sfan5 i would change the default debug flags to -O1
19:23 sfan5 if someone wants to use memcheck they change it to -O as suggested in the text
19:23 est31 then people will complain that memcheck has weird bugs
19:23 sfan5 read the text please
19:23 sfan5 "Since this often makes things unmanageably slow, a reasonable compromise is to use -O. This gets you the majority of the benefits of higher optimisation levels whilst keeping relatively small the chances of false positives or false negatives from Memcheck"
19:24 est31 Im still against making -O1 in debug mode
19:24 sfan5 for what reasons?
19:24 est31 you already have to turn off luajit for valgrind, you shouldnt need to fiddle with even more settings
19:24 est31 just to be abled to revert some commit for a pointless reason
19:25 sfan5 i dont want to revert that commit
19:25 est31 your goal is to revert the PR?
19:25 sfan5 it would be pointless
19:25 sfan5 what were arguing about right now is whether changing the debug flags to -O1 would have been a better way to fix this
19:26 est31 My honest opinion would have been to live with this, and change it where you touch the code
19:26 est31 to not break prs
19:26 sfan5 change it back to i++ you mean?
19:26 est31 no, change it to ++i where you already change something else close to that
19:27 sfan5 but that makes no sense
19:27 sfan5 we already discussed that
19:27 est31 ++i is better
19:27 sfan5 the compiler will optimize it away with any sane optimisation level
19:27 sfan5 there is no point
19:27 est31 where is i++ actually faster?
19:27 sfan5 idk
19:27 sfan5 but i am not saying that
19:27 est31 so why do that, instead of ++i
19:28 est31 with ++i you are only better
19:28 UnknownSentinel left #minetest-dev
19:28 sfan5 because the person who coded it did it that way
19:28 est31 and its not requiring some serious efforts
19:28 sfan5 just because it doesn't require a lot of effore doesn't mean it's a good idea to do it
19:29 est31 sfan5, I agree that we shouldnt accept prs that just change code style to person's personal preference
19:29 est31 back and forth back and forth
19:29 sfan5 the only thing that s/i++/++i/ (on code that you change anyway) does is add another thing programmers need to look out for
19:29 est31 but in this case there is a speedup argument
19:29 sfan5 est31: yes i agree on that too
19:29 est31 its weak agreed,, but it is there
19:29 sfan5 not really
19:29 ElectronLibre joined #minetest-dev
19:30 H-H-H joined #minetest-dev
19:30 sfan5 it's not a speedup imo if any sane optimizations level will make the compiler optimize it away
19:30 est31 the game should be playable in debug mode as well
19:30 est31 with debug mode still being abled to be used for debugging
19:30 sfan5 it is if you change debug mode to -O1
19:31 sfan5 then it will still be usable for debugging
19:31 est31 no
19:31 sfan5 yes
19:33 est31 I gtg
19:44 Lunatrius joined #minetest-dev
19:53 Amaz joined #minetest-dev
20:36 Siva joined #minetest-dev
20:54 Siva_AndroIRC joined #minetest-dev
21:01 paramat joined #minetest-dev
21:02 Siva_AndroIRC joined #minetest-dev
21:24 zupoman joined #minetest-dev
21:49 sloantothebone joined #minetest-dev
22:21 emptty joined #minetest-dev
22:48 Fritigern joined #minetest-dev
22:52 Siva joined #minetest-dev
23:03 RealBadAngel joined #minetest-dev
23:05 paramat left #minetest-dev

| Channels | #minetest-dev index | Today | | Google Search | Plaintext