Lou Montana/Sandbox – User
Code Optimisation
Introduction
This article will try to be a general guide about improving your code and its performance.
- The first part (Rules) will focus on having a clean, readable and maintainable code.
- The second part (Code optimisation) is about improving performance, sometimes trading it against code readability.
- The third part (Equivalent commands performance) mentions commands that in appearance have identical effects but may differ in terms of performance according to the use you may have of them.
- The fourth part (Conversion from earlier versions) is a hopefully helpful, short guide about useful new commands or syntaxes to replace the old ways.
Color code
- means you must change your ways today, or with us you will ride…
- means you may want to look at it if you are targeting pure performance
- means the gain is little to unsignificant. Going through your code looking for this replacement is not worth it, but future code should be written this way.
Rules
In the domain of development, any rule is a rule of thumb. If a rule states for example that it is better that a line of code doesn't go over 80 characters, it doesn't mean that any line must not go over 80 characters; sometimes, the situation needs it. If you have a good structure, do not change your code to enforce a single arbitrary rule. If you break many of them, you may have to change something. Again, this is according to your judgement.
With that being said, here are the three basic rules to get yourself in the clear:
Make it work
Your first goal when coding is to make your code do what you want it does. A good way to reach this objective is to read and getting inspired by other people's code. If you understand it by reading it once, it is probably a good source of inspiration.
When starting from scratch if you know what you want but miss the specific steps to get to your point, it is a good practice to write down in your native language what you want to do. E.g Get all the units near the city, and for each west soldier in them, add damage.
Make it readable
Whether you are cleaning your code or a different person's, you must understand the code without twisting your brain:
- While SQF is impacted by variable name length, this should not take precedence on the fact that code must be readable by a human being. Variables like _u instead of _uniform should not be present.
- One-lining (putting everything in one statement) memory improvement is most of the time not worth the headache it gives when trying to read it. Don't overuse it.
- Indentation is important for the human mind, and space is too. Space is free, use it.
- Same goes for line return; it helps to see a code block wrapping multiple
- Do you see the same code multiple times, only with different parameters? Now is the time to write a function!
- Is your function code far too long? Split it in understandable-sized bites, for your own sanity.
- Finally, camel-casing (namingLikeThis) your variables and commands will naturally make the code more readable, especially for long names.
See the following code:
_w=[]; {_w pushbackunique primaryweapon _x} foreach((allunits+alldeadmen) select{_x call bis_fnc_objectside==east});
The same example is far more readable with proper spacing, good variable names and intermediate results:
_weaponNames = [];
_allUnitsAliveAndDead = allUnits + allDeadMen;
_allEastAliveAndDead = _allUnitsAliveAndDead select { _x call BIS_fnc_objectSide == east };
{ _weaponNames pushBackUnique primaryWeapon _x } forEach _allEastAliveAndDead;
- if you have a lot of if..else, you may want to look at a switch condition, or again break your code in smaller functions.
Optimise then
Once you know what is what, you can understand your code better.
- You were iterating multiple times on the same array?
- You should be able to spot your issue now.
- Are you using execVM on the same file, many times?
- Store your function in memory to avoid file reading every call with
_myFunction = compile preprocessFileLineNumbers "myFile.sqf";
- Store your function in memory to avoid file reading every call with
- Is your function code far too long?
- Split it in understandable-sized bites, for your own sanity.
- Is your variable name far too long?
- Find a smaller name, according to the variable scope:
e.g
{ _opforUnitUniform = uniform _x; systemChat _opforUnitUniform; } forEach _allOpforUnits;
becomes
{ _uniform = uniform _x; systemChat _uniform; } forEach _allopforUnits;
Code optimisation
Lazy evaluation
private _myVar = if (false) then { 33; } else { 66; }; // 0.0020 ms private "_myVar"; if (false) then { _myVar = 33; } else { _myVar = 66; }; // 0.0025 ms
Successive condition check
In SQF the following code will check all and every condition, even if one fail:
if (condition1 && condition2 && condition3) then { /* thenCode */ };
This code will check condition1, and if it is not true condition2 and condition3 will execute anyway. To avoid this behaviour, you can either imbricate ifs or use lazy evaluation such as the following:
if (condition1 && { condition2 } && { condition3 }) then { /* thenCode */ };
This method will stop condition evaluation on the first false statement.
Using lazy evaluation is not always the best way as it could speed up the code as well as slow it down, depending on the current condition being evaluated:
["true || {{false} || {false}}", nil, 100000] call BIS_fnc_codePerformance; // 0.00080 ms ["true || {false} || {false }", nil, 100000] call BIS_fnc_codePerformance; // 0.00105 ms ["false || false || false ", nil, 100000] call BIS_fnc_codePerformance; // 0.00123 ms ["true || false || false ", nil, 100000] call BIS_fnc_codePerformance; // 0.00128 ms ["false || {false} || {false} ", nil, 100000] call BIS_fnc_codePerformance; // 0.00200 ms
Concatenating multiple small strings together
myString = myString + otherString
works fine for small strings, however the bigger the string gets the slower the operation becomes:
myString = ""; for "_i" from 1 to 10000 do { myString = myString + "123" }; // 290 ms
The solution is to use a string array that you will concatenate later:
strings = []; for "_i" from 1 to 10000 do {strings pushBack "123"}; strings = strings joinString ""; // 30 ms
Multiplayer recommendations
TODO
- no publicVariable or public setVariable at high frequency
- the server is supposed to have a lot of memory, use it
- variable name length impacts network?
createSimpleObject vs createVehicle
TODO create at [0,0,0]
Equivalent commands performance
if
if..then { /* thenCode */ }; // fastest if..exitWith { /* exitCode */ }; // fast if..then { /* thenCode */ } else { /* elseCode */ }; // normal if..then [{ /* thenCode */ },{ /* elseCode */ }] // normal
Both if..then { /* thenCode */ } else { /* elseCode */ };
and if..then [{ /* thenCode */ }, { /* elseCode */ }];
have the same performance.
for
The for..from..to..do
is twice as fast as its alternative syntax, for..do
.
for "_i" from 0 to 10 do { /* forCode */ }; // 0.015 ms for [{_i = 0}, {_i < 100}, {_i = _i + 1}] do { /* forCode */ }; // 0.030 ms
forEach vs count
Both commands will step through supplied array of elements one by one and both commands will contain reference to current element in the _x variable.
However, count loop is a little faster than forEach loop, but it does not have _forEachIndex variable.
Also, there is a limitation as the code inside count expects Boolean or Nothing while itself returns Number.
{diag_log _x} count [1,2,3,4,5]; // 0.082 ms
{diag_log _x} forEach [1,2,3,4,5]; // 0.083 ms
Usage:
_someoneIsNear = {_x distance [0,0,0] < 1000} count allUnits > 0;
_someoneIsNear = { if (_x distance [0,0,0] < 1000) exitWith { true }; false } forEach allUnits;
findIf (since Arma 3 v1.82) stops array iteration as soon as the condition is met.
[0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9] findIf { _x == 2 }; // 0.005 ms _quantity = { _x == 2 } count [0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]; // 0.0114 ms
+ and format
When concatenating more than two strings, format is faster than +. Use:
format ["%1%2%3%4%5", "string1", "string2", "string3", "string4", "string5"]; // faster
Instead of:
"string1" + "string2" + "string3" + "string4" + "string5"; // slower
select and if
Use [[Inline code|[array] select Boolean}} instead of the lazy-evaluated if.
_result = ["false result", "true result"] select true; // 0.0011 ms _result = if (true) then { "true result"; } else { "false result"; }; // 0.0017 ms
private
Direct declaration (private _var = value
since Arma 3 v1.53) is faster than declaring then assigning the variable.
private _a = 1;
private _b = 2;
private _c = 3;
private _d = 4;
// 0.0023 ms
private ["_a", "_b", "_c", "_d"];
_a = 1;
_b = 2;
_c = 3;
_d = 4;
// 0.0040 ms
However, if you have to reuse the same variable in a loop, external declaration is faster.
The reason behind this is that a declaration in the loop will create, assign and delete the variable in each loop.
An external declaration creates the variable only once and the loop only assigns the value.
for "_i" from 1 to 100 do { private _a = 1; private _b = 2; private _c = 3; private _d = 4; }; // 0.186776 ms
private ["_a", "_b", "_c", "_d"];
for "_i" from 1 to 100 do
{
_a = 1;
_b = 2;
_c = 3;
_d = 4;
};
// 0.146327 ms
objectParent and vehicle
isNull objectParent player // 0.0013 ms, slightly faster
vehicle player == player // 0.0022 ms
nearEntities and nearestObjects
- nearEntities is much faster than nearestObjects given on range and amount of object(s) which are within the given range.
If a range was set to more thean 100 meters it is highly recommend to use nearEntities instead of nearestObjects.
Note: nearEntities only searches for objects which are alive. Killed units, destroyed vehicles, static objects and buildings will be ignored by the nearEntities command.
Config path delimiter
>>
is slightly faster than /
when used in config path with configFile or missionConfigFile:
configFile >> "CfgVehicles" // 0.0019 ms
is (very slighlty) faster than
configFile / "CfgVehicles" // 0.0023 ms
getPos* and setPos*
getPosWorld // 0.0015 ms getPosASL // 0.0016 ms getPosATL // 0.0016 ms getPos // 0.0020 ms position // 0.0020 ms getPosVisual // 0.0021 ms visiblePosition // 0.0021 ms getPosASLW // 0.0023 ms
setPosWorld // 0.0060 ms setPosASL // 0.0060 ms setPosATL // 0.0060 ms setPos // 0.0063 ms setPosASLW // 0.0068 ms setVehiclePosition // 0.0077 ms with "CAN_COLLIDE" // 0.0390 ms with "NONE"
Conversion from earlier versions
Each iteration of Bohemia games (Operation Flashpoint, Arma, Arma 2, Take On Helicopters, Arma 3) brought their own new commands, especially Arma 2 and Arma 3.
For that, if you are converting scripts from older versions of the engine, some aspects should be reviewed:
Loops
Array operations
- Adding an item:
myArray + [element]
andmyArray set [count myArray, element]
have been replaced by pushBack - Selecting a random item: BIS_fnc_selectRandom has been replaced by selectRandom
- Removing items:
myArray set [1, objNull]; myArray - [objNull]
has been replaced by deleteAt and deleteRange - Concatenating:
myArray = myArray + [element]
has been reinforced with append: if you don't need the original array to be modified, use + - Comparing: use isEqualTo instead of BIS_fnc_areEqual or a custom comparison function
- Finding common items: in forEach loop has been replaced by arrayIntersect
- Condition filtering: forEach can be replaced by select (alternative syntax)
result = [];
{
if (_x % 2 == 0) then
{
result pushBack _x;
};
} forEach arrayOfNumbers; // 2.57 ms
result = (arrayOfNumbers select { _x % 2 == 0 }); // 1.55 ms
String operations
String manipulation has been simplified with the following commands:
- string select index
- toArray and toString have been reinforced with splitString and joinString
Multiplayer
- BIS_fnc_MP has been replaced by remoteExec and remoteExecCall. Use them!