Thread: DriectX SDK or XNA ?

  1. #16
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    maybe wrapper isn't the proper term to be programming is very much C-style, where there are tons and tons of global functions and global #defines, so they had to convert that into more "user-friendly" object-oriented classes.

    i find C# more productive because it's easier to get started. in general there is much less required initialization code for anything you want to do. there are defaults already selected for you. but after all that is done, i really don't see a big difference in productivity between the 2 languages.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Inside my computer
    In other words, it's just a library where more thought and easiness of use has been put work into. They chose to put that work in C# rather than C++...
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  3. #18
    Cat without Hat CornedBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    C# is just easier to learn than C++. It doesn't have many of the complex parts of C++, it has garbage collection, it is loaded with syntactic sugar.
    This makes it the ideal target for their ease-of-use library, because the users of C++ (in their view) are the game companies, which wouldn't accept the abstraction penalty of such a library anyway, and thus wouldn't use it.
    All the buzzt!

    "There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
    - Flon's Law

  4. #19
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Quote Originally Posted by Elysia View Post
    C# can never beat C++ in speed and will never get on equal footing with optimized code. My point was that C# is unsuitable for games (Because it's too darn slow! Microsoft, are you blind?!), and I stand by that.
    The performance difference is actually pretty small, a few percent at most, especially since CPU is becoming less and less of the performance bottleneck, and from the GPU's point of view, it's running the same HLSL either way. Generally, CPU is no longer the limiting factor to your game's performance, and thus CPU efficiency is less important.

    And, if your game actually needs many of the advanced memory management features of C# -- such as being able to dynamically relocate objects in memory to avoid memory fragmentation, garbage collection, etc. -- the difference in performance becomes even smaller. And as there are games that take 1.5 GB+ of memory, and are designed for Win32 (with only 2 GB available virtual address space for each application), memory fragmentation rears its ugly head more and more.
    You ever try a pink golf ball, Wally? Why, the wind shear on a pink ball alone can take the head clean off a 90 pound midget at 300 yards.

Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Flex 3 SDK on Kubuntu
    By sean in forum Linux Programming
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-12-2008, 06:41 PM
  2. DirectSound header issues
    By dxfoo in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-19-2006, 07:16 PM
  3. Win32 API or Win32 SDK?
    By jverkoey in forum A Brief History of
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-20-2005, 03:26 PM
  4. Question..
    By pode in forum Windows Programming
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 12-19-2004, 07:05 PM
  5. Directx SDK Documentation
    By Zoalord in forum Game Programming
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-08-2003, 06:07 AM