| 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/viewtopic.php?f=6&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/manual/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 |
