Remember Josh has been at this for years, and there will be some deep lying stuff that makes him feel ashamed about how poorly he wrote it all those years back. Stuff that previously was causing stuff to break. :3Kimny wrote:I think that is the more intriguing question. Others have offered nice guesses/assessments of what Josh might have been implementing, but all have mostly focused on the code design patterns, on the programming modularity. While certainly the code design can operate significant performance gains when it corrects previous design mistakes, firstly I doubt that a great coder always focused on optimization like Josh would have made such detrimental performance mistakes in the past.Personally, McSven is quite right in asking, what kind if tech in C/ assembler could Josh implement to get the performance tweaks he's suggested?
Secondly, while beneficial to the productivity, I very much doubt that altering the code design, or the modularity alone, would give the orders of magnitude gain that Josh has talked about. I remember, however, Josh commenting that the use of scripting language within the main code has grown to the point of affecting performance, so I would guess that most significant parts of the performance gain came from better integrating LTSL within the main engine, or even from re-writing LTSL in a lighter-weight fashion.
Also the entire engine design is one of the earlier steps he would have completed, long before he knew the full requirements for what he has now.
It's basically going back and rebuilding Noah's ark with modern materials and a propulsion system :3