i guess tanner being here gives you some pull
i guess tanner being here gives you some pull
Pit still has limits sure, but we were able to do more generic instantiations in recent JITs
Pthis was actually Andy Ayers responding to one of Kai's issues, with impressive turnaround too
Moh, sweet!
Lim going to inline every function and have a gigabyte bin
Ai can't think of a situation where someone would reasonably need to mix and match refs arrays and unsafe, in any combination
99.9% of people will either be using fully managed, or fully unsafe, i can almost guarantee
just look at opentk, i have never once seen anyone use the pointer overloads, span overloads, etc
i've only ever seen people use the safe overloads
99.9% of people will either be using fully managed, or fully unsafe, i can almost guarantee
just look at opentk, i have never once seen anyone use the pointer overloads, span overloads, etc
i've only ever seen people use the safe overloads
Mthe point of most of these functions is that they can be squished down to 0 native code when called :P
KHonestly the JIT team has impressive speed when you show the some IL -> ASM dump that is "bad" and have at least a batshit crazy reason to do this (at least any reason)
Ai get wanting to make it feel at home in C#, i think that's a good way to go about doing things
but i don't personally think adding extra types is the right way to go
but i don't personally think adding extra types is the right way to go
AI did that with pie a long time ago, it was absolutely horrible to use
Mwhat's your idea then?
Mkeep as-is, unsafe everything?
Pit's worth noting what we're discussing here is not Silk.NET 3.0. This is SilkX, a completely different library. there is still room for another contributor to create a different library to propose that it gets blessed as 3.0
Kive mixed arrays and ref at the same time in calls a ton actually, albeit not mixing safe and unsafe, mixing ref and span is useful a ton actually
KIdk if this is up to date btw, but technically AggressiveInlining is guaranteed for top-level inlines so function A calling function B with AggressiveInlining is guaranteed, but then anything beyond is not, just a strong hint.
And then if it's huge huge you can just make it multiple functions, which will the also help with JIT not perishing when tracking variables and that.
And then if it's huge huge you can just make it multiple functions, which will the also help with JIT not perishing when tracking variables and that.
Kbut really if those functions have locals and things like that you're probably doing something wrong with AggressiveInlining....
Pit's not guaranteed, there are still limits but there's just a lot of things that relax those limits now.
Poh right
Pyeah just read your whole comment
PI WITHDRAW MY REMARK
VDeleted User#0000
note that on net5 this is only solved for top-level inlines.
note that on net5 this is only solved for top-level inlines.
Original Message
Quoted by kaijellinghaus#0000
Anot quite
keep unsafe, but have safe overloads as well
aka taking arrays
and perhaps a span as well, although as spans can be converted to pointers very easily i wouldn't say that span is a high priority - i don't see many people using spans (myself included, never seen the point of them)
if you remove the mix and matching, even with spans, you'd have a max of 3 overloads, and as i said before, i'm fairly confident 99% of people will only ever use the fully safe overloads
and having it obvious what they do will really help development and UX
i can say that as a beginner if I saw a
even now I would question why it is using a custom type instead of pure unsafe or safe
on a personal level, I just think
i may be missing something here, so this is just a personal opinion on what i've seen so far
keep unsafe, but have safe overloads as well
aka taking arrays
and perhaps a span as well, although as spans can be converted to pointers very easily i wouldn't say that span is a high priority - i don't see many people using spans (myself included, never seen the point of them)
if you remove the mix and matching, even with spans, you'd have a max of 3 overloads, and as i said before, i'm fairly confident 99% of people will only ever use the fully safe overloads
and having it obvious what they do will really help development and UX
i can say that as a beginner if I saw a
Ptr<T>even now I would question why it is using a custom type instead of pure unsafe or safe
on a personal level, I just think
Ptr<T>i may be missing something here, so this is just a personal opinion on what i've seen so far
Pthis is my point, this is literally Silk.NET 1.X
Marrays blow, we'd be constantly marshalling and allocating stuff
Ajust internally convert it to a pointer?
Ktbh I'm not against having TerraFX style functions with raw ptr + the typed ptrs
Monly works one way
KI don't see why not + it provides compat with external libs that work with ptrs
AVDeleted User#0000
I just submitted repro code for an issue regarding AggressiveInlining that doesn't even contain a single AggressiveInlining
Original Message
Quoted by kaijellinghaus#0000
Kmore inlining docs
Kbut what do we do for char**
Kconst char**we can't do T[][] that's just not correct
Mthat would be ref T[]?
Kand
T*[]and
ROSpan<Span<T>>no - and that will potentially require some allocation
but again, very easy for the user
and the performance hit that will be encountered is really not enough to matter
but again, very easy for the user
and the performance hit that will be encountered is really not enough to matter
Ai created a very fast alloc + buffer copy system in pie and you can't tell the difference between using that system and just sending the data over raw in tests
Pfor reference, these were the overloads in 1.9:
https://github.com/dotnet/Silk.NET/blob/v1.9.0/src/Vulkan/Silk.NET.Vulkan/Vk.gen.cs
https://github.com/dotnet/Silk.NET/blob/v1.9.0/src/OpenGL/Silk.NET.OpenGL/GL.gen.cs
https://github.com/dotnet/Silk.NET/blob/v1.9.0/src/Vulkan/Silk.NET.Vulkan/Vk.gen.cs
https://github.com/dotnet/Silk.NET/blob/v1.9.0/src/OpenGL/Silk.NET.OpenGL/GL.gen.cs
Athe thing is, with any safe context, you will always lose some performance to make it clean
if you wanted raw performance, don't use C#, simple as
if you wanted raw performance, don't use C#, simple as
Athe garbage collector gives far more of a performance hit than a little bit of allocation here and there
Ato make something safe, there is always some compromise
KIs C# the best language to do this? Maybe not. But there's very good reason you and everyone else here does it anyways....
And the GC hurting performance more then a little bit of allocation is just wrong. The whole reason the GC may hurt performance is because of those allocations
And the GC hurting performance more then a little bit of allocation is just wrong. The whole reason the GC may hurt performance is because of those allocations
KIt's well established that with performance and allocation minded code C# can be some of the fastest code around
Ksee ASP.NET Core
Mif what you want are very high level bindings can't cppsharp do that
Keeeeh
KI mean that's what TerraFX does, provide 100% unsafe raw methods
Apersonally the main reason I use C# is because I hate C++ headers and rust sucks for gamedev
that is literally the only reason
my opinion of C# as a language has gone way down the drain, I wish I did not have to use it
however that's not to say it doesn't have its merits, and clean and understandable code is one major benefit of the language, no need for unsafe, no need for weird types, just give something an array and it works
that is literally the only reason
my opinion of C# as a language has gone way down the drain, I wish I did not have to use it
however that's not to say it doesn't have its merits, and clean and understandable code is one major benefit of the language, no need for unsafe, no need for weird types, just give something an array and it works
Mi meant the opposite, 100% safe methods