1. 11
  1.  

  2. 5

    Ha! Interesting clash with this interesting approach taken by John Carmack (of Id fame).

    On the subject of code duplication, I tracked all the bugs (problems that surfaced after I thought everything was working correctly) I fixed for a while, and I was quite surprised at how often copy-paste-modify operations resulted in subtle bugs that weren’t immediately obvious. For small vector operations on three or four things, I would often just past and modify a few characters like this:

    v[0] = HF_MANTISSA(*(halfFloat_t *)((byte *)data + i*bytePitch+j*8+0));

    v[1] = HF_MANTISSA(*(halfFloat_t *)((byte *)data + i*bytePitch+j*8+1));

    v[2] = HF_MANTISSA(*(halfFloat_t *)((byte *)data + i*bytePitch+j*8+2));

    v[3] = HF_MANTISSA(*(halfFloat_t *)((byte *)data + i*bytePitch+j*8+3));

    I now strongly encourage explicit loops for everything, and hope the compiler unrolls it properly. A significant number of my bugs related to things like this, and I am now rethinking even two dimensional cases where I commonly use discrete _X, _Y or _WIDTH, _HEIGHT variables. I find that much easier to read than a two element array, but it is difficult to argue with my data on how often it made me screw up.

    1. 3

      It’s not a clash. This blog points to the performance benefits of unrolling, Carmack points out the quality negatives. As always, it’s up to you to make the trade-off. Now you have the pros & cons, which do you choose? (And how do you know if you made the right decision?)