Timeline for Fastest way to look up an entity with a set of components?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 29 at 18:22 | comment | added | iiFreeman | Thank you so much, what a wonderful idea! | |
| Sep 5, 2019 at 13:52 | history | edited | Theraot | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1228 characters in body
|
| Jul 17, 2019 at 3:05 | vote | accept | jj232 | ||
| Jul 16, 2019 at 7:00 | comment | added | Theraot | @jj232 thiking about this, I realized that an special "has no components" query would solve most - if not all - cases where a negative query would be used. And those are few to begin with. | |
| Jul 16, 2019 at 6:51 | comment | added | Theraot | @jj232 see addendums. | |
| Jul 16, 2019 at 6:50 | history | edited | Theraot | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Addendums
|
| Jul 16, 2019 at 3:44 | comment | added | jj232 | First of all, thank you for the answer. I had few questions regarding the queries. If I were to save a query (any structure with a list of components) and map that to a list of entities, how would the negative queries work (not having specific components). Would a specific query that says this is a negative query have to be added as a key to the dictionary? I assume that components would have to be added in the same order for a specific query for this to work. As for the bit array to work like this, would I need a pre-determined enum to map the list of components? Thank you again! | |
| Jul 16, 2019 at 2:06 | vote | accept | jj232 | ||
| Jul 17, 2019 at 3:05 | |||||
| Jul 16, 2019 at 0:57 | history | edited | Theraot | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 9 characters in body
|
| Jul 16, 2019 at 0:46 | history | answered | Theraot | CC BY-SA 4.0 |