| Time |
Nick |
Message |
| 00:54 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 01:02 |
|
Taoki joined #minetest-dev |
| 01:16 |
|
ANAND joined #minetest-dev |
| 01:18 |
|
kilbith joined #minetest-dev |
| 01:32 |
|
nephele_ joined #minetest-dev |
| 02:02 |
ANAND |
Haven't resolved the merge conflict yet, but #7924 is ready for testing |
| 02:02 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/7924 -- [NO SQUASH] Allow binding dig, place actions to keys; remove LMB/RMB hardcoding by ClobberXD |
| 02:03 |
ANAND |
Testers (if any :P), please go through testing instructions in the first post to know what to and what not to expect while testing. |
| 04:17 |
|
webchat-user1234 joined #minetest-dev |
| 04:18 |
|
webchat-user1234 joined #minetest-dev |
| 04:20 |
webchat-user1234 |
Is nerzhul/nrzkt still active in here? |
| 04:22 |
webchat-user1234 |
I wanted to make a bug report about the android client release but the contact email listed (contact minetest.net) bounced with no such user, and I can't find a direct email for them on their github or blog. |
| 04:30 |
EvergreenTree |
He is pretty active on the unofficial discord: https://discord.gg/kKN5Cp |
| 04:30 |
webchat-user1234 |
Much appreciated c: |
| 04:33 |
|
webchat-user1234 left #minetest-dev |
| 05:51 |
|
erlehmann_ joined #minetest-dev |
| 06:01 |
|
calcul0n joined #minetest-dev |
| 06:22 |
|
nerzhul joined #minetest-dev |
| 06:35 |
|
calcul0n_ joined #minetest-dev |
| 08:32 |
ANAND |
WIP PR #9705 |
| 08:32 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/9705 -- set_fov: Add support for time-based transitions by ClobberXD |
| 08:39 |
|
ShadowNinja joined #minetest-dev |
| 10:18 |
|
Fixer joined #minetest-dev |
| 11:15 |
|
Kimapr joined #minetest-dev |
| 12:28 |
|
turtleman joined #minetest-dev |
| 12:58 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 14:01 |
|
kilbith joined #minetest-dev |
| 14:19 |
|
Lone_Wolf joined #minetest-dev |
| 15:01 |
|
Lone_Wolf joined #minetest-dev |
| 15:08 |
sfan5 |
merging #9689, #9699, #9700, #9698 in 10 minutes |
| 15:08 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/9689 -- serverpackethandler: Reduce pkt->getPeerId() invocations and more by HybridDog |
| 15:08 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/9699 -- Apply a scrollbar's default value to scroll containers by Desour |
| 15:08 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/9700 -- Formspec: allow lists to change size and existence while the formspec is open by Desour |
| 15:08 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/9698 -- script: Move SAO usability check so that it covers all functions by sfan5 |
| 15:11 |
|
absurb joined #minetest-dev |
| 15:28 |
|
DS-minetest joined #minetest-dev |
| 15:34 |
ANAND |
#9705 is ready for review! :tada: |
| 15:34 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/9705 -- set_fov: Add support for time-based transitions by ClobberXD |
| 15:40 |
|
Kimapr joined #minetest-dev |
| 15:49 |
nerzhul |
bunch of MR merge, find :D |
| 15:49 |
nerzhul |
fine* |
| 15:50 |
nerzhul |
also i have an idea of a thing which should be in builtin, i saw each mod implementing a on step global callback just to loop through players. Cannot we just have a registration implementation to do a on_step for each player directly ? |
| 15:51 |
nerzhul |
minetest.register_player_on_step(func) => in builtin minetest.on_step() func, for each get connected players(p) => cb(p) |
| 15:51 |
nerzhul |
this permits to drop the always same registration model and reduce core on step callback number by generating a simple way to do on_step events on playerSAO, what do you think about ? |
| 15:52 |
nerzhul |
i think pure lua implem is sufficient for this one :) |
| 15:52 |
DS-minetest |
there are also many mods which don't do this on every step but only eg. each 5 seconds |
| 15:52 |
nerzhul |
yep first is to have a on_step but we can imagine add timers for players too in builtin |
| 15:53 |
nerzhul |
DS-minetest are you able to code a such thing ? |
| 15:53 |
nerzhul |
if yes i may write the user story in our issues |
| 15:53 |
nerzhul |
(i'm not very huge lua coder but i may do some work if needed) |
| 15:55 |
DS-minetest |
timers would basically just duplicate core.after, as much as player-wise on_step would duplicate on_globalstep |
| 15:55 |
DS-minetest |
implementing such a thing in lua should be easy |
| 15:55 |
DS-minetest |
but is the performance gain really so high? |
| 15:56 |
nerzhul |
here it's not for performance gain but to reduce modders dup code |
| 15:56 |
DS-minetest |
hm, right |
| 15:57 |
nerzhul |
i'm reading various mods and looking what can be our improvement paths, and i just see that each mod with player look just call get_connected_player which if i remember locks the server thread a tiny amount of time, then we can reduce very short the core locking between ServerThread and ConnectionThreads |
| 15:57 |
DS-minetest |
if such a thing is added, it might maybe make sense to also add other callbacks that are also there for luaentities, like on_punch |
| 15:57 |
nerzhul |
on_punch is not already called from core direct and overwritten by various mods ? |
| 15:58 |
DS-minetest |
oh, right, possible |
| 15:59 |
rubenwardy |
this should have low priority |
| 15:59 |
rubenwardy |
register_on_punch_player already exists, btw |
| 16:00 |
nerzhul |
low priority for coredevs maybe, but if it's not difficult to implement anybody can take the time to do it |
| 16:00 |
nerzhul |
i'm writing the user story issue |
| 16:01 |
nerzhul |
remember that we can have priorities but that doesn't mean we discard new ideas :D |
| 16:01 |
DS-minetest |
it would be great if such a register_on_player_step (or whatever it's called) also had collision information |
| 16:02 |
DS-minetest |
but that's prolly unrealistic, as the server doesn't do the player collision |
| 16:03 |
rubenwardy |
I agree with reducing verbosity |
| 16:08 |
nerzhul |
i just opened #9707, feel free to code :D |
| 16:08 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/9707 -- Add minetest.register_player_on_step (or find a better name) |
| 16:29 |
|
ANAND joined #minetest-dev |
| 16:34 |
|
DS-minetest joined #minetest-dev |
| 16:46 |
|
kilbith joined #minetest-dev |
| 16:51 |
DS-minetest |
nerzhul: #9708 |
| 16:51 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/9708 -- Add minetest.register_player_on_step by Desour |
| 16:52 |
Krock |
will push https://krock-works.uk.to/u/patches/0001-Shaders-Complete-478e753.-OpenGL-4.3-compatiblity.patch in 10 minutes. Fixes #9675 |
| 16:52 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/9675 -- Bug with textures of grass, mushroom and others |
| 16:58 |
sfan5 |
nerzhul: if you mean the env lock, it is always locked when ABMs/active object on_step/on_globalstep runs |
| 16:58 |
sfan5 |
calling get_connected_players() one instead of 20 times can save cpu time, but it is not relevant for locking |
| 17:03 |
Krock |
pushing patch |
| 17:03 |
|
fluxflux joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:08 |
Krock |
> it means on each step we will serialize multiple times the the LuaRef for the same player. |
| 17:08 |
Krock |
why is that a problem, nerzhul ? |
| 17:09 |
Krock |
the reference already exists in Lua, thus it's probably just creating another userdata reference to it, which takes next to no time |
| 17:09 |
Krock |
and player:is_player() in this situation must not be needed |
| 17:11 |
sfan5 |
it doesn't even create a new reference, it's just retrieved from a table |
| 17:11 |
Krock |
entities are retrieved from a table - players too? |
| 17:13 |
DS-minetest |
the table returned by get_connected_players would have to be built multiple times |
| 17:21 |
Krock |
little effort |
| 17:25 |
|
kilbith joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:28 |
sfan5 |
Krock: yes |
| 17:28 |
Krock |
til. |
| 17:46 |
nerzhul |
sfan5 yep i checked locking is not there :) |
| 17:46 |
nerzhul |
my point is this have a convenient medium level interface to register player steps |
| 17:46 |
nerzhul |
no sense to have dozens of get_connected players to loop through them |
| 17:47 |
nerzhul |
this will be easier for moder to implement function on player step like this without involving the previous code |
| 17:47 |
nerzhul |
and yes little effort, but we need to have higher level API, in builtin too, for convenience, adoption and increase global modding code quality (nice improvements on 5.1 & 5.2 guys, about that, gg) |
| 17:48 |
nerzhul |
i will maintain my position that having low level code only is counter productive for modders and the effort here is minimal on builtin compared to the gain on each new implementation :) |
| 17:50 |
Krock |
low level is most generic, and doesn't clutter the API |
| 17:51 |
nerzhul |
this PR is generic |
| 17:52 |
nerzhul |
and low level is less performant, you take time to serialize & deserialize the lua state each time |
| 17:53 |
Krock |
what exactly is (de)serialized each time? |
| 17:53 |
nerzhul |
here the PR is not for performance but to increase code quality on mods and easiness to implement a step on players, preventing rebuilding the world. We should really stop talking only low level. Remember also if we provide higher level API it means when we need to do a maintenance it's easier for us to prevent brekage on users implementations because their code is tiner. |
| 17:54 |
nerzhul |
on each step you have x callbacks on step to run on the server side. Each time there is C++ to lua transformation to do the step. |
| 17:54 |
nerzhul |
on each registered step for the player you call get_connected_player which serialize the lua refs from core to lua for each player (ok we don't have thousands of players but it's really CPU duplication effort). |
| 17:54 |
Krock |
one kind of callback only switches once from C++ to Lua and back |
| 17:55 |
Krock |
run_callbacks() runs them all in Lua |
| 17:55 |
nerzhul |
then for a regular survival server, you have between 3 and 10 times the same step call with the same get connected player |
| 17:56 |
nerzhul |
i totally understand it's not the biggest perf bottleneck of minetest, and this one will be hard to track and fix (especially if we continue to provide only low levels api) |
| 18:00 |
Krock |
In most cases the rate is limited by time inside on_globalstep. For example: HUDs that only run checks every second |
| 18:01 |
Krock |
and that causes too much effort when individual player callbacks are run |
| 18:01 |
Krock |
the only place where this callback would be useful is for mods that need it to run for every single step |
| 18:02 |
Krock |
item pickup maybe.. what else? |
| 18:06 |
nerzhul |
wieldview use that |
| 18:06 |
nerzhul |
factory |
| 18:06 |
nerzhul |
hudbars, with a timer calculation |
| 18:07 |
nerzhul |
map with a timer |
| 18:07 |
nerzhul |
mobkit relies on it to spawn mobs it seems |
| 18:07 |
nerzhul |
player_api in mtg |
| 18:07 |
nerzhul |
weather in mtg with a timer |
| 18:08 |
nerzhul |
then it sounds with a regular server with not too many mods it's already called in multiple places :D |
| 18:08 |
sfan5 |
such a callback isn't directly usable with a timer though |
| 18:08 |
Krock |
^ my point |
| 18:08 |
nerzhul |
you have per player timer |
| 18:08 |
nerzhul |
or mod timer directly |
| 18:08 |
Krock |
that's quite annoying to set up |
| 18:09 |
Krock |
you don't know how many players there are, so dtime calculations mod-wide add overhead |
| 18:09 |
nerzhul |
this is already mod wide with the timers |
| 18:09 |
nerzhul |
(when they uses timer) |
| 18:09 |
Krock |
found register_globalstep 52 times in 339 mods |
| 18:09 |
nerzhul |
wow your server has 339 mods :D |
| 18:10 |
Krock |
and only few of those can make easy use of this callback |
| 18:10 |
nerzhul |
also remind that LuaEntitySao as a on_step call |
| 18:10 |
nerzhul |
it's just the same thing :D |
| 18:10 |
sfan5 |
how would I convert this code to use the new register function? http://sprunge.us/4yZDEU?lua |
| 18:11 |
nerzhul |
and honestly we should impelment at the end this call in snc in core, because the player stepping should be run by the PlayerSAO like the LuaEntitySAO does i think :) |
| 18:11 |
Krock |
sfan5: good example, thanks. |
| 18:11 |
sfan5 |
other than using a timer per-player timers (for which there is no need), I don't see a way |
| 18:11 |
nerzhul |
for this one i don't see it's exact |
| 18:12 |
Krock |
timer = timer + dtime / #minetest.get_connected_players() |
| 18:12 |
Krock |
easy |
| 18:12 |
sfan5 |
nerzhul: yes, but isn't this a common case? |
| 18:12 |
nerzhul |
oka ignore my shit, it seems i always say shit :) |
| 18:12 |
Krock |
that will increase the timer correctly depending on the player count. but wait, wasn't this also about reducing get_connected_players calls? |
| 18:12 |
nerzhul |
in my mods it seems it's half of the cases |
| 18:12 |
sfan5 |
no the proposal is not bad, but the question is how many mods can really use it |
| 18:13 |
nerzhul |
it depends on how you want to set the player ref rich or not |
| 18:13 |
nerzhul |
currently i just see the get_connected_players calls with grep, but do we have another way to do the same thing ? |
| 18:17 |
nerzhul |
maybe by proposing it we will see more usages on this usecase with the callback ? honestly i don't know, but if i want to run hunger and other stats steps i may use a such thing with a timer yeah |
| 18:17 |
Krock |
https://pastebin.com/raw/FatJLZfF 25 mods that use get_connected_players() and register_on_globalstep() in the same file |
| 18:18 |
Krock |
not even 25 mods. and some of them are timer-limited |
| 18:20 |
nerzhul |
is the new way appliables on some cases ? most of them or none ? |
| 18:22 |
Krock |
checked half of them.. no suitable place found yet. I thought at least wield3d.. but that also uses a timer |
| 18:22 |
sfan5 |
areas also uses a timer doesn't it? |
| 18:24 |
Krock |
yes it does. not keen checking the rest, but I don't think any of those runs the code for every step |
| 18:26 |
nerzhul |
okay then it sounds non coverable need, except if we add timer support in fact |
| 18:26 |
Krock |
I think that was already planned as an extension to minetest.after |
| 18:26 |
nerzhul |
maybe that can do the trick with embedded timer support, is this possible to update the current implementation without craziness to add that ? |
| 18:26 |
Krock |
to add "jobs" |
| 18:28 |
Krock |
#6118 |
| 18:28 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/6118 -- Add named queuing system by octacian |
| 18:28 |
Krock |
actually no, it's not that PR |
| 18:39 |
|
GreenXenith joined #minetest-dev |
| 19:05 |
|
Wuzzy joined #minetest-dev |
| 19:35 |
|
nephele_ joined #minetest-dev |
| 19:40 |
|
Kimapr joined #minetest-dev |
| 20:02 |
|
fluxflux joined #minetest-dev |
| 20:55 |
|
benrob0329 joined #minetest-dev |
| 21:04 |
|
Kimapr_ joined #minetest-dev |
| 21:12 |
sfan5 |
// Ordered for size, please do not reorder |
| 21:13 |
sfan5 |
[later in the struct]: a shared_ptr and SColor after an u8 |
| 21:21 |
|
kilbith joined #minetest-dev |
| 21:24 |
kilbith |
so we have benrob0329 -- a guy with zero contribution -- who dares to kick me on -hub |
| 21:24 |
kilbith |
*clap* |
| 21:25 |
rubenwardy |
not undeserved |
| 21:25 |
kilbith |
you think so? |
| 21:26 |
kilbith |
but if it's the case, maybe it's time for me to retire |
| 21:27 |
kilbith |
-but |
| 21:31 |
nephele_ |
what did you do for benrob to kick you? o_0 |
| 21:32 |
kilbith |
doesn't matter, that's the final end for me here |
| 21:32 |
rubenwardy |
Jordach was wrong to say what he did, but your reaction was more than disproportionate. Your contributions don't make you immune to the rules |
| 21:32 |
rubenwardy |
and... mised |
| 21:32 |
nephele_ |
:( |
| 21:33 |
rubenwardy |
Context: https://rwdy.uk/SN4yb.png |
| 21:34 |
nephele_ |
benrob has a minetest channel on discord huh |
| 21:36 |
benrob0329 |
It's not mine, but I am a mod there. |
| 21:38 |
nephele |
also... 0 contributions? so... do i get more street cred, for having like half a contribution? |
| 22:04 |
|
Lone_Wolf joined #minetest-dev |
| 23:35 |
|
turtleman joined #minetest-dev |
| 23:48 |
|
Taoki joined #minetest-dev |
| 23:51 |
|
Sokomine joined #minetest-dev |
| 23:58 |
|
Miner_48er joined #minetest-dev |
