C#•2y ago

[SOLVED] Storing pointers in an array instead of the objects themselves?

Id like to store some objects in an array like this. I know that the array will contain a lot of empty spots so I would like to store pointers instead of reserving space for the entire object. Sadly this does not seem to be possible because the object is a managed object.

public class RuntimeObject : SerializeableObject { }

public class RuntimeObject : SerializeableObject { }

public class SerializeableObject
{
    public virtual string Serialize() => "";
    public virtual RuntimeObject Deserialize(string data) => null;
}

public class SerializeableObject
{
    public virtual string Serialize() => "";
    public virtual RuntimeObject Deserialize(string data) => null;
}

I don't think that storing the data in an array like this is the most optimal way, but seeing that I need the data in a 2D array like structure this is the most performant thing I could come up with. I was also thinking about storing an array of dictionaries to get rid of the empty spots, only that would increase lookup time. If anyone has a better alternative to this please let me know ^_^ (The reason why the array contains a lot of empty spots is because the lookup index matters, things in the x direction are of the same type, and things in the y direction are related to eachother)

21 Replies

streepje8OP•2y ago

(Please ping me on reply, that way I can get back to you the quickest)

Buddy•2y ago

Nice red squiggly lines That tells so blobthumbsup

streepje8OP•2y ago

I mentioned this in the post already but the error is due to the object being a managed type

sibber•2y ago

classes in c# are reference types which means theyre always allocated on the heap so when you do new SomeClass() a reference, aka a pointer, is returned

streepje8OP•2y ago

Oh that makes sense

sibber•2y ago

structs on the other hand are allocated inline so RuntimeObject[] is an array of pointers/references

streepje8OP•2y ago

Good to know ^_^ Thanks Would you know a better alternative to solve this problem? Since i feel like allocating an array with a lot of nullpointers would be a waste of memory

sibber•2y ago

how big would the array be?

streepje8OP•2y ago

sibber•2y ago

and are you only allocating it once?

streepje8OP•2y ago

It doesn't have to be an array

sibber•2y ago

isnt a game scene just a collection of entities and their components?

streepje8OP•2y ago

It is, only im trying to store in a way where i can lookup components in an array while also beeing able to loop through all components of the same type in a very effective way (by having all components of the same type stored next to eachtoher in memory)

sibber•2y ago

you could create an array for each component type, and then an array or dictionary that contains those array

streepje8OP•2y ago

Yea, I think that nesting dictionaries in the array would be the best option But thanks for thinking with me ^_^

sibber•2y ago

nesting dictionaries? why?

streepje8OP•2y ago

sorry I worded that wrong I ment putting a dictionary in a list

sibber•2y ago

oh well you only need one unless i misunderstood

streepje8OP•2y ago

Jup, the way im currently looking at it i might need none

streepje8OP•2y ago

im currently mainly looking on having a 2D list stored in ram like this

streepje8OP•2y ago

im just not sure how to achieve it Since the lists might resize im not sure how it will work with that Since i dont want to reallocate everything when one of them changes (So for example, in this case the green can be the objects that keep track of where the components are, while the orange part are all the transforms and the red part is some other component that needs more memory and the blue one the same as red but with less mem usage) This way when i loop over either all the game objects or all the transforms, or the transforms i can have the best cache consistency Now that im looking at it, i dont have to store them all in one variable That would simplify it by a lot Ill figure something out

Gaming

Programming

[SOLVED] Storing pointers in an array instead of the objects themselves?