I have a project in which I'm trying to remove the "collision box" (Rectangle class) of one of my enemy. My game logic basically is:

foreach (Enemy e in Enemy.enemiesOnScreen) {
            if (e._isDead) {
                e._collisionBox = new Rectangle(0, 0, 0, 0);
            else {

What I wrote works perfectly, but wouldn't that be subject to memory overflow (for a much higher number of instances) or bad optimization in a real game project ?

  • \$\begingroup\$ Not familiar with xna but have you tried e._collisionBox = null; or something similar? \$\endgroup\$ – TomTsagk Nov 2 '18 at 11:05
  • \$\begingroup\$ Yup I've already tried that. Setting it to null doesn't work, it's not accepted. \$\endgroup\$ – Muska Nov 2 '18 at 12:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ If null isn't accepted, then it sounds like your Rectangle type is a struct. Assigning a new instance of a struct to an existing field does not cause memory allocation, as discussed previously here \$\endgroup\$ – DMGregory Nov 2 '18 at 12:32
  • \$\begingroup\$ Is there a reason you need to remove the collision box from a dead enemy? Have you considered doing a check if an enemy is dead in your collision detection code instead of checking vs an empty box? Even if a new struct does not allocate memory it feels somewhat wasteful to construct an object each frame (presumably) just to not use it. \$\endgroup\$ – Mikael Nov 2 '18 at 13:36
  • \$\begingroup\$ @DMGregory Thanks for the link, I got it now. Assigning a new instance of a struct doesn't allocate memory anywhere else since the struct already allocates storage memory for its values. \$\endgroup\$ – Muska Nov 2 '18 at 15:05

Since the Rectangle class is a struct, all the storage memory allocation is already done. In this case, assigning the 0, 0, 0, 0 values to my rectangle to "remove" it from the scene is FINE and will not cause any memory / optimization issues in a much bigger project with much more instances.

Althought I found a better alternative which is :

e._collisionBox = Rectangle.Empty;

Easier and more readable code. Still don't know if this is the best option in this situation but, I'll be fine with that.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.