BananaBread, the port of the Sauerbraten first person shooter from C++ and OpenGL to JavaScript and WebGL, is making good progress. We are starting to work on polish and our artist gk is in the process of making some very cool levels!
Here are some screenshots. First, here are parts of the larger of the three levels,
and here is another part of that level, where water effects are turned on maximum (both reflection and refraction, and glare),
Here is the medium-sized level,
which has a very different theme to it. You can also see a bot charging towards me there. Finally, here is the smaller level,
and here in that level is a ferocious squirrel on the attack,
(the squirrel model is from the Yo Frankie game).
What the screenshots can't show is that playing a first person shooter in a web browser (without any plugins!) is an interesting experience, I guess because it isn't a common thing yet. Try it :)
Alon Zakai aka kripken | Compiling to the Web: Emscripten, Binaryen, asm.js, WebAssembly, etc. New posts at: https://kripken.github.io/blog/
Pages
▼
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
StatCounter and Statistics
"In summary - the Net Applications sample is small (it is based on 40,000 websites compared to our 3,000,000). Weighting the initial unrepresentative data from that small sample will NOT produce meaningful information. Instead, applying a weighting factor will simply inflate inaccuracies due to the small sample size." http://gs.statcounter.com/press/open-letter-msVery misleading. I have no idea which of StatCounter and Net Applications is more accurate. But that argument is off.
In statistics, sample size is basically irrelevant past a certain minimal size. That's how a survey of 300 people in the US can predict pretty well for 300 million. The number of people doesn't matter in two ways: First, it could be 1 million or 1 billion, the actual population size is irrelevant, and second, it could be 3,000 or 30,000 and it would not be much better than 300. The only exception to those two facts is if the population size is very small, say 100. Then a sample size of 100 is guaranteed to be representative, obviously. And for very small sample sizes like say 5, you have poor accuracy in most cases. But just 300 people is enough for any large population.
The reason is the basic statistical law that the standard deviation of the sample is the same as of the population, divided by the square root of the sample size. If you are measuring something like % of people using a browser, the first factor doesn't matter much. That leaves the second. Happily for statistics, 1 over square root decreases very fast. You get to accuracy of a few percent with just a few hundred people, no matter what the population size.
So that StatCounter has 3,000,000 websites and Net Applications has 40,000 means practically nothing (note that 40,000 even understates it, since those are websites. The number of people visiting those sites is likely much larger). 40,000 is definitely large enough: In fact, just a few hundred datapoints would be enough! Of course, that is only if the sample is unbiased. That's the crucial factor, not sample size. We don't really know which of StatCounter and Net Applications is less biased. But the difference in sample size between them is basically irrelevant. Past a minimal sample size, more doesn't matter, even if it seems intuitively like it must make you more representative.
Many More Falling Blocks
Several months ago I made a demo of box2d.js, a port of the 2D physics engine Box2D to JavaScript. I made the demo using 15 falling blocks because that's what ran well at the time. Checking the demo now, I see
that JavaScript Engine improvements allow for the possibility of
many more falling blocks. Here is a version of that demo with 80 falling blocks.
On the current Firefox GA Release (13) the frame rate with 80 blocks often drops briefly to 20fps, which is not great. But on Firefox Nightly (16), I get very smooth frame rates, very close to 60fps! I see similar results in Chrome Dev (21) as well [1]. So it looks like it is now possible to run games on the web with lots of 2D physics in them.
[1] On Opera 12 I manually enabled WebGL, but sadly the page doesn't render properly.
On the current Firefox GA Release (13) the frame rate with 80 blocks often drops briefly to 20fps, which is not great. But on Firefox Nightly (16), I get very smooth frame rates, very close to 60fps! I see similar results in Chrome Dev (21) as well [1]. So it looks like it is now possible to run games on the web with lots of 2D physics in them.
[1] On Opera 12 I manually enabled WebGL, but sadly the page doesn't render properly.
Friday, June 15, 2012
Debugging JavaScript is Awesome
I sometimes find myself debugging large amounts of JavaScript, typically a combination of Emscripten-compiled C++ and handwritten JavaScript that it interfaces with. It turns out to be pretty easy and fun to do.
Obviously that's a personal opinion and it depends on the type of code you debug as well as your debugging style. My C++ debugging style tends to be to add printfs in relevant places, recompile and run, only using gdb when there are odd crashes and such. So in JavaScript this turns out to be better than C++: You add your prints but you don't need to recompile, just reload the page.
But it gets even better. You can use JavaScript language features to make your life easier. For example, I've been debugging OpenGL compiled to WebGL, and sometimes a test would start to fail when I made a change. It is really really easy to add automatic logging of every single WebGL command that is generated, see the 30 or so lines of code starting here. That wraps the WebGL context and logs everything it does. So I can log the output before a commit and after, diff those, and see what went wrong. I also have similar code in Emscripten to log out each call to a libc function. Of course that sort of thing is possible in C++ too, but it is much trickier, while in JavaScript it is pretty simple.
And actually it is better still. Unlike a regular debugger like gdb, when you debug JavaScript you can script debugging tasks directly in the code with immediate effect. For example, when debugging BananaBread I might see something wrong in the particle effects but nowhere else. If so I can just jump into the source code, set a variable to 1 when starting to render particles, and set it to 0 when leaving. I can then check that variable when logging GL stuff, and I'll only see the relevant code. It's also useful for more complex situations like logging specific data on the Nth call to a function or only when certain situations hold. Since reloads are so fast, this is very efficient and effective. I heard gdb has a python scripting option, and maybe other debuggers have similar tools, but really nothing can beat scripting your debug procedure using the same language as your code like you can with JS: There is nothing to learn, your have the full power of the language, and you just hit reload.
And of course there are other nice things like being able to print out new Error().stack to get a stack trace at any point in time, JSON.stringify(x, null, 2) to get nice pretty-printed output of any object, etc.
Obviously that's a personal opinion and it depends on the type of code you debug as well as your debugging style. My C++ debugging style tends to be to add printfs in relevant places, recompile and run, only using gdb when there are odd crashes and such. So in JavaScript this turns out to be better than C++: You add your prints but you don't need to recompile, just reload the page.
But it gets even better. You can use JavaScript language features to make your life easier. For example, I've been debugging OpenGL compiled to WebGL, and sometimes a test would start to fail when I made a change. It is really really easy to add automatic logging of every single WebGL command that is generated, see the 30 or so lines of code starting here. That wraps the WebGL context and logs everything it does. So I can log the output before a commit and after, diff those, and see what went wrong. I also have similar code in Emscripten to log out each call to a libc function. Of course that sort of thing is possible in C++ too, but it is much trickier, while in JavaScript it is pretty simple.
And actually it is better still. Unlike a regular debugger like gdb, when you debug JavaScript you can script debugging tasks directly in the code with immediate effect. For example, when debugging BananaBread I might see something wrong in the particle effects but nowhere else. If so I can just jump into the source code, set a variable to 1 when starting to render particles, and set it to 0 when leaving. I can then check that variable when logging GL stuff, and I'll only see the relevant code. It's also useful for more complex situations like logging specific data on the Nth call to a function or only when certain situations hold. Since reloads are so fast, this is very efficient and effective. I heard gdb has a python scripting option, and maybe other debuggers have similar tools, but really nothing can beat scripting your debug procedure using the same language as your code like you can with JS: There is nothing to learn, your have the full power of the language, and you just hit reload.
And of course there are other nice things like being able to print out new Error().stack to get a stack trace at any point in time, JSON.stringify(x, null, 2) to get nice pretty-printed output of any object, etc.