Haxe

123 readers

1 users here now

Welcome to the (unofficial) Haxe community!

In their own words, "Haxe is an open source high-level strictly-typed programming language with a fast optimizing cross-compiler." Mostly it's been used to create a lot of really cool indie games, like these:

Honestly I'm a pretty novice programmer myself, but I'm moderating this community anyway because it needed one. If you have experience with Haxe and are willing to moderate, please let me know and I'll promote you!

A bunch of game engines are written for Haxe, including:

There's even Stencyl, a gamedev tool built on Haxe that has a GUI and requires little to no coding. Including a block-based coding interface if you're into that sort of thing.

I'll add more resources here as they occur to me or people suggest them!

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

FlxG.collide() vs FlxG.overlap() vs FlxTilemap.overlaps(), with respect to FlxTilemap objects (lemmy.one)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/haxe

2 comments fedilink hide all child comments

So, the FlxG collide method knows how to tell which tiles in a tilemap are walls or not walls, but the overlap method does not. If you write a simple custom collision with the overlap method and tell it to .separate(), your sprite will collide with every tile in the map, not just the walls.

This is expected behavior, as there's a note in the FlxG documentation that says:

this takes the entire area of FlxTilemaps into account (including "empty" tiles). Use FlxTilemap#overlaps() if you don't want that.

On the other hand, the documentation for FlxTilemaps.overlaps() says:

Checks to see if some FlxObject overlaps this FlxObject object in world space. If the group has a LOT of things in it, it might be faster to use FlxG.overlaps().

In my scenario I have a lot of tilemaps and just one object to collide with them, the player. The way this is written, I'm thinking I have to call this method for EACH MAP, i.e. map1.overlaps(player), map2.overlaps(player), etc. Whereas with the FlxG method I can pass it the entire FlxGroup of maps as one parameter and the player as another parameter, which seems way better. I guess I could write a function with a loop that iterates through each map doing this one by one, and then call that in update(), but I'm getting the impression that it might be really inefficient.

What's the best approach here? Am I missing something obvious?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Update: Got it working for now, but I suspect it's very inefficient!

So, for some context, I have a bunch of tilemaps right up against each other forming one large continuous world map made up of many small regions. I wanted the player to have random encounters that were specific to the region they're crossing. In examples online, I saw that people will write custom collision behavior with FlxG.overlap() instead of the default FlxG.collide() because they want different kinds of collisions to behave differently. I thought I could use that to fold my region-specific-encounters stuff into the collision-detection stuff. My thought was, It's got to be more efficient to only check the player's location once per update, rather than multiple times, right? Only, I never figured out how to do it...

So instead, every update I'm using the default collide method, and also writing the player's location to a singleton. When an encounter procs, another function uses that location to pick an appropriate encounter. And it works! But I'm checking the same thing twice per update... Surely that's unnecessary right?