its an implementation detail of the benchmarks lol so they didnt want to draw attention
its an implementation detail of the benchmarks lol so they didnt want to draw attention
Ktrue
Mif i can avoid writing expression emit code for field access, that makes things cleaner
Malso this avoids the overhead of a DynamicMethod not scoped to the same module
Mwhich is a stupid thing to care about but FastExpressionCompiler cares about it so
Kyeah i think they just want to try and not draw attention to it lmao
Kbut it is useful in some cases
M
Kdefining an extern method that does private field modification is extremely the sort of thing you dont advertise because its so absurd and unsafe lmao
MIT'S FUN
Koh i agree
Kim with you on this one lmao
Kits just objectively not the sort of thing thats not getting advertised prominently
Mi silly goofy with the obscure runtime errors
Klol
KUtf8.TryWrite is still by far my fav thing
Mbeing cursed aside, that library looks pretty cool. i should fork it
Mreminds me of protobuf
MCompositeFormat is such a pathetic optimization
Klmao
Mno way this shit was anyone's bottleneck
Mit turns an already pretty fast thing... slightly faster
Mi also do my logging with an insane formattable string handler hack
Mit goes against all good sense
Mbut it's an improvement against my previous source-generated static direct-to-console logging class with a condition for logging to file, with hardcoded formatting so that it didn't need to allocate strings
Kit seems to be used in the internals of microsoft extensions logging abstractions
Kbecause structured logging
Ki think
Ki honestly dont know lmao
DWonder how long it will take Unity to put out this fire they started.
Moh it's so over for them
KYeah they’re never recovering from this. Even if they walk everything back, people won’t trust that they won’t pull this crap again later on
KAnd that next thing might be even worse
KAlso this all revealed that they secretly modified their TOS to remove the portion that said “if you don’t like new license requirements you can decline them and just use an old version of unity”
KSo now they can add whatever stupid stuff they want to their license and it will take effect retroactively and you have no way to reject it
KWhich they proved by telling everyone that yeah you need to pay install fees now even if you released your game years ago
K
- Re-install charges - we are not going to charge a fee for re-installs.
- Fraudulent installs charges - we are not going to charge a fee for fraudulent installs. We will work directly with you on cases where fraud or botnets are suspected of malicious intent.
- Trials, partial play demos, and automation installs (devops) charges - we are not going to count these toward your install count. Early access games are not considered demos.
- Web and streaming games - we are not going to count web and streaming games toward your install count either.
- Charity-related installs - the pricing change and install count will not be applied to your charity bundles/initiatives.
Kthey are essentially already paddling back hard
KI very much doubt that they came up with these beforehand, but are now realizing that devs give out keys all the time to build a community
KRe-install charges - we are not going to charge a fee for re-installs.this one is also suuuuper confusing? So it's just a fixed royalty per copy?
I mean > 90% of people that buy the game outright (no bundles, trials) will install it, no?
KWould it not have been pretty accepted if they would just add a "pls pay us $0.20 per copy sold"?
KI mean that's still an ass move, but seems pretty ok. Would just have to clarify whether free-to-play is included in this or not
KLmao how are they even going to differentiate between "charity related installs" and "fradulent installs" and actual legit installs... hell how are they going to differentiate between a new install and a reinstall if they've said it themselves they "do not collect identifiable information, only aggregate information"
KThis is 1000% just bullshit they're throwing out there in the desperate hopes that people don't leave so they can do one final push for super revenue before their brand dies
KI mean I'm guessing that they are going to do what they are saying, but this 100% was not the plan from the start
KRe-install charges - we are not going to charge a fee for re-installs.this is basically reverting to a fixed per-copy-sold royalty
KI'm excited to see how they are going to clean the resulting confusion up
KLike they can either break the hell out of GDPR and that california privacy law and track things properly... but then they'll be fined to hell and back by both EU and California.
KOr they can respect them both and not have enough information to track basically anything beyond maybe a blip that
Program.exe was ran with DeveloperUUID XXXKIt's gonna be fun seeing them flail... but the damage has already been done
KNo matter how much they walk this back, most of their customer base now have one foot out the door making preparations to leave before unity pulls their next thing which might be just a plain old $1 monthly fee per copy sold or something equally ridiculous
