you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 3 years ago (7 children)

@Ferk hey, professional Godot developer here

i've ran a lot of projects over the years: you rarely make code that runs in a way that these inefficiencies become a problem.

in order for this to be the bottleneck, you need to run really efficient code already, which is what 99% of problems dont require

its more of a non-issue unless you're doing highly specific work :)

yes, technically you can reduce overhead by compiling a GDExtension, but for most people this is overkill ✨

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    Are you sure this isn't selection bias?

    Is it really that the the Godot approach is fast enough most of the time, or is it that everyone who needs perf has just decided to use something else.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago* (2 children)

    Thanks for the insight!
    I assume you are talking about compiling a GDExtension using C or some lower level language, right? not C#
    What I'm wondering is if it'd actually be more efficient to use C# than GDScript in Godot. Because I would have expected the opposite.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    @Ferk we’re using Rust with GDNative

    the reason not being performance, but language features (Rust makes it easy to have good safety guarantees)

    C# is overall more performant than GDScript, but it is rare that you get to use that performance in a way that it makes a measurable difference

    i always just tell people to work with what they know well and what makes them feel comfortable, thats the most important

    great part about godot: you can run these languages side by side ✨

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment