i'm trying to make this interaction with keyboard for movement using some sprites and i got stuck with two situations.
1) The character movement is not going acording to the animation itself (it only begin moving after one second or so while it's already being animated). What i really want it to do is, to move without a "initial acceleration feeling" that i get because of this problem
2) I can't think of a way to make the character face the position it should be facing when the key is released. I'll post the code here, but since it need images to work correctly and is not so small i made a skecth available at this link if you want to check it out: https://www.openprocessing.org/sketch/439572
PImage[] reverseRun = new PImage [16];
PImage[] zeroArray = new PImage [16];
void setup(){
size(800,600);
//Right Facing
for(int i = 0; i < zeroArray.length; i++){
zeroArray[i] = loadImage (i + ".png");
zeroArray[i].resize(155,155);
}
//Left Facing
for( int z = 0; z < reverseRun.length; z++){
reverseRun[z] = loadImage ( "mirror" + z + ".png");
reverseRun[z].resize(155,155);
}
}
void draw(){
frameRate(15);
background(255);
imageMode(CENTER);
if(x > width+10){
x = 0;
} else if (x < - 10){
x = width;}
if (i >= zeroArray.length){
i = 3;} //looping to generate constant motiion
if ( z >= reverseRun.length){
z = 3;} //looping to generate constant motiion
if (isRight) {
image(zeroArray[i], x, 300);
i++;
} //going through the images at the array
else if (isLeft) {
image(reverseRun[z],x,300);
z++;
} going through the images at the array
else if(!isRight){
image(zeroArray[i], x, 300);
i = 0; } //"stoped" sprite
}
}
//movement
float x = 300;
float y = 300;
float i = 0;
float z = 0;
float speed = 25;
boolean isLeft, isRight, isUp, isDown;
void keyPressed() {
setMove(keyCode, true);
if (isLeft ){
x -= speed;
}
if(isRight){
x += speed;
}
}
void keyReleased() {
setMove(keyCode, false);
}
boolean setMove(int k, boolean b) {
switch (k) {
case UP:
return isUp = b;
case DOWN:
return isDown = b;
case LEFT:
return isLeft = b;
case RIGHT:
return isRight = b;
default:
return b; }
}
The movement problem is caused by your operating system setting a delay between key presses. Try this out by going to a text editor and holding down a key. You'll notice that a character shows up immediately, followed by a delay, followed by the character repeating until you release the key.
That delay is also happening between calls to the keyPressed() function. And since you're moving the character (by modifying the x variable) inside the keyPressed() function, you're seeing a delay in the movement.
The solution to this problem is to check which key is pressed instead of relying solely on the keyPressed() function. You could use the keyCode variable inside the draw() function, or you could keep track of which key is pressed using a set of boolean variables.
Note that you're actually already doing that with the isLeft and isRight variables. But you're only checking them in the keyPressed() function, which defeats the purpose of them because of the problem I outlined above.
In other words, move this block from the keyPressed() function so it's inside the draw() function instead:
if (isLeft ){
x -= speed;
}
if(isRight){
x += speed;
}
As for knowing which way to face when the character is not moving, you could do that using another boolean value that keeps track of which direction you're facing.
Side note: you should really try to properly indent your code, as right now it's pretty hard to read.
Shameless self-promotion: I wrote a tutorial on user input in Processing available here.
Related
I'm trying to do wall collision for objects and I've followed a tutorial that offers one method of doing collision.
This is the tutorial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZU1QJJdxgs
Currently, if the object detects a wall, instead of moving it's full distance, it moves pixel by pixel until it's against the wall. This worked well until I started trying to rotate the object with image_rotate, because it caused objects to get stuck in walls by either sliding against them or if they rotated into them.
I fixed this by using draw_sprite_ext instead and changing the rotation of the sprite itself and not the mask, which worked for about 20 minutes until it started causing more problems.
///obj_player Step
//Initialise Variables
hor_speed = 0;
ver_speed = 0;
accelerationspeed = 0.2;
decelerationspeed = 0.2;
maxspeed = 3;
pointdirection = 0;
//Get player's input
key_right = keyboard_check(ord("D"))
key_left = -keyboard_check(ord("A"))
key_up = -keyboard_check(ord("W"))
key_down = keyboard_check(ord("S"))
pointdirection = point_direction(x,y,mouse_x,mouse_y) + 270
hor_movement = key_left + key_right;
ver_movement = key_up + key_down;
//horizontal acceleration
if !(abs(hor_speed) >= maxspeed) {
hor_speed += hor_movement * accelerationspeed;
}
//horizontal deceleration
if (hor_movement = 0) {
if !(hor_speed = 0) {
hor_speed -= (sign(hor_speed) * decelerationspeed)
}
}
//vertical acceleration
if !(abs(ver_speed) >= maxspeed) {
ver_speed += ver_movement * accelerationspeed;
}
//vertical deceleration
if (ver_movement = 0) {
if !(ver_speed = 0) {
ver_speed -= (sign(ver_speed) * decelerationspeed)
}
}
//horizontal collision
if (place_meeting(x+hor_speed,y,obj_wall)) {
while(!place_meeting(x+sign(hor_speed),y,obj_wall)) {
x += sign(hor_speed);
}
hor_speed = 0;
}
//vertical collision
if (place_meeting(x,y+ver_speed,obj_wall)) {
while(!place_meeting(x,y+sign(ver_speed),obj_wall)) {
y += sign(ver_speed);
}
ver_speed = 0;
}
//move the player
x += hor_speed;
y += ver_speed;
///obj_player Draw
//rotate to look at cursor
draw_sprite_ext(spr_player, 0, x,y,image_xscale,image_yscale, pointdirection, image_blend, image_alpha);
I think the best way to rotate objects is through image_rotate, and I'd like to do it without getting stuff stuck in walls. Can my current method of collision be adapted to do this, or should I attempt to do it in a different way?
Your code looks fine, but if you're going to be rotating objects then you would also need to consider having a "knock back mechanic." Reason being is the player could be sitting next to this wall and if you rotate the object over them so they cant move, its not a fun time being stuck.
So you 'could' have the object that's rotating do a check before rotating and if objects are in the way then either stop it or push them back so they cant be within range.
I am learning p5.js and wanted to generate a "static/noise texture" like so:
This is the code:
for (let y = 0; y < height; y++) {
for (let x = 0; x < width; x++) {
noiseVal = random(0,1);
stroke(255, noiseVal*255);
point(x,y);
}
}
This produces the desired outcome but it's obviously pretty slow since it has to iterate over every single pixel. What would be a more efficient way of doing this?
Your code is really not the best way to do with p5.js.
Take a look to the p5's pixels array.
When I run the following code, the function that use the pixels array run 100 times faster.
function setup() {
createCanvas(50, 50);
background(255);
let start, time;
start = performance.now();
noise_1();
time = performance.now() - start;
print("noise_1 : " + time);
start = performance.now();
noise_2();
time = performance.now() -start;
print("noise_2 : " + time);
}
// Your code
function noise_1() {
for (let y = 0; y < height; y++) {
for (let x = 0; x < width; x++) {
noiseVal = random(0,1);
stroke(noiseVal*255);
point(x,y);
}
}
}
// same with pixels array
function noise_2() {
loadPixels();
for (let i=0; i < pixels.length; i+=4){
noiseVal = random(0, 255);
pixels[i] = pixels[i+1] = pixels[i+2] = noiseVal;
}
updatePixels();
}
output :
noise_1 : 495.1
noise_2 : 5.92
To generate a single frame of static, you're going to have to iterate over each pixel. You could make your blocks larger than a single pixel, but that will only reduce the problem, not get rid of it completely.
Instead, you can probably get away with pre-computing a few images of static (let's say 10 or so). Save these as a file or to an off-screen buffer (the createGraphics() function is your friend), and then draw those images instead of drawing each pixel every frame.
i was looking some examples of interactions with the keyboard and stumbled upon this code that i found interesting. But i'm having trouble understanding a certain part of it(it's marked down below).I don't get how all this whole ''boolean'' declaration, ''switch'' and ''CASE'' works, i tried to look in the reference but still. Could someone explain in a simple maner how these work?
float x = 300;
float y = 300;
float speed = 5;
boolean isLeft, isRight, isUp, isDown;
int i = 0;
void keyPressed() {
setMove(keyCode, true);
if (isLeft ){
x -= speed;
}
if(isRight){
x += speed;
}
}
void keyReleased() {
setMove(keyCode, false);
}
boolean setMove(int k, boolean b) {// <<<--- From this part down
switch (k) {
case UP:
return isUp = b;
case DOWN:
return isDown = b;
case LEFT:
return isLeft = b;
case RIGHT:
return isRight = b;
default:
return b; }
}
Questions like these are best answered by the reference:
Works like an if else structure, but switch() is more convenient when you need to select between three or more alternatives. Program controls jumps to the case with the same value as the expression. All remaining statements in the switch are executed unless redirected by a break. Only primitive datatypes which can convert to an integer (byte, char, and int) may be used as the expression parameter. The default is optional.
The rest of the code is setting the corresponding variable to whatever value you passed in as the b parameter, and then returning it.
You should get into the habit of debugging your code. Add print statements to figure out exactly what the code is doing.
I'm new to processing and trying to make a very simple program where i have an arduino that produces a seriel input (according to an analogue read value). The idea is a Processing window will open with a block color shown for 30 seconds. In this time all the readings from the arduino will be summed and averaged - creating an average for that color.
After 30 seconds the colour will change and a new average (for the next color) will start being calculated. This is the code i have started to write (for now focusing on just one 30 second period of green).
I realise there are likely problems with the reading/summing and averaging (i havent researched these yet so i'll put that to one side) - but my main question is why isn't the background green? When i run this program i expect the background to be green for 30 seconds - where as what happens is it is white for 30 seconds then changes to green. Can't figure out why! Thanks for any help!
import processing.serial.*;
Serial myPort;
float gsrAverage;
float greenAverage;
int gsrValue;
int greenTotal = 0;
int greenCount = 1;
int timeSinceStart = 0;
int timeAtStart;
int count=0;
color green = color(118,236,0);
void setup () {
size(900, 450);
// List all the available serial ports
//println(Serial.list());
myPort = new Serial(this, Serial.list()[0], 9600);
}
void draw () {
while (timeSinceStart < 30000) {
background(green);
greenTotal = greenTotal + gsrValue;
greenCount = greenCount + 1;
delay(500);
timeSinceStart = millis()-timeAtStart;
//println(timeSinceStart); for de bugging
}
greenAverage = greenTotal/greenCount;
//println(greenAverage); for de bugging
}
void serialEvent (Serial myPort) {
int inByte=myPort.read();
//0-255
gsrValue=inByte;
}
What I like to do for timers, is use IF statements and use millis() or a constantly updated variable 'm' right inside the condition:
int timeSinceStart;
int m;
void setup(){
timeSinceStart = millis(); // initialize here so it only happens once
}
void draw(){
m = millis(); // constantly update the variable
if(timeSinceStart + 30000 < m){
greenAverage = greenTotal/greenCount; // or whatever is outside while loop
timeSinceStart = millis();
}
//Anything that went inside the while loop can go here, or above the IF
}
This makes it so around every 30 seconds, the background will change once, and you just re-update the timeSinceStart variable in there too. This way, it will only update when you want it to update and not constantly update and break the code.
I tend not to use while loops in processing as they usually cause headaches. Hope my example helps.
May have found a way round this using an IF statement. I perhaps looked over the fact the draw function is itself a loop, so i was able to use a variation of
if (timeSinceStart < 5000) {
background(green);
}
within draw.
When dealing with timed events in Processing you should not use while loops inside the draw() function. The draw() function itself is a while loop which updates the "screen" each frame.
So, what you should do is create a timer and let it do a switch for you inside the draw() function. In your case, if you want to start with a green screen, you do that in the setup() function, and then create a method for altering according to a timer in your draw() function.
This is a suggestion on how you could solve your particular problem. Just change the cycle variable according to your need. In your case it would be 30000.
boolean isGreen = true;
int startTime = 0;
int lastTime = 0;
int cycle = 1000; //the cycle you need
void setup() {
size(200, 200);
background(0, 255, 0); //green
}
void draw() {
startTime = millis();
if (startTime > lastTime + cycle) {
if (isGreen) {
background(255); //white
isGreen = !isGreen;
} else {
background(0, 255, 0); //green
isGreen = !isGreen;
}
lastTime = millis();
}
}
I am trying to increase the performance of the update(); function below. The numbers inside the mathNumber variable will come from an NSString created from a text field. Even though I'm using five numbers I would like it to be able to run any amount that the user inserts into a text field. What are some ways I could speed up the code in update(); with C and/or Objective-C? I also would like it to work on the Mac and iPhone.
typedef struct {
float *left;
float *right;
float *equals;
int operation;
} MathVariable;
#define MULTIPLY 1
#define DIVIDE 2
#define ADD 3
#define SUBTRACT 4
MathVariable *mathVariable;
float *mathPointer;
float newNumber;
void init();
void update();
float solution(float *left, float *right, int *operation);
void init()
{
float *mathNumber = (float *) malloc(sizeof(float) * 9);
mathNumber[0] =-1.0;
mathNumber[1] =-2.0;
mathNumber[2] = 3.0;
mathNumber[3] = 4.0;
mathNumber[4] = 5.0;
mathNumber[5] = 0.0;
mathNumber[6] = 0.0;
mathNumber[7] = 0.0;
mathNumber[8] = 0.0;
mathVariable = (MathVariable *) malloc(sizeof(MathVariable) * 4);
mathVariable[0].equals = &mathPointer[5];
mathVariable[0].left = &mathPointer[2];
mathVariable[0].operation = MULTIPLY;
mathVariable[0].right = &mathPointer[3];
mathVariable[1].equals = &mathPointer[6];
mathVariable[1].left = &mathPointer[1];
mathVariable[1].operation = SUBTRACT;
mathVariable[1].right = &mathPointer[5];
mathVariable[2].equals = &mathPointer[7];
mathVariable[2].left = &mathPointer[0];
mathVariable[2].operation = ADD;
mathVariable[2].right = &mathPointer[6];
mathVariable[3].equals = &mathPointer[8];
mathVariable[3].left = &mathPointer[7];
mathVariable[3].operation = MULTIPLY;
mathVariable[3].right = &mathPointer[4];
return self;
}
// This is updated with a timer
void update()
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 4; i++)
{
*mathVariable[i].equals = solution(mathVariable[i].left, mathVariable[i].right, &mathVariable[i].operation);
}
// Below is the equivalent of: newNumber = (-1.0 + (-2.0 - 3.0 * 4.0)) * 5.0;
// newNumber should equal -75
newNumber = mathPointer[8];
}
float solution(float *left, float *right, int *operation)
{
if ((*operation) == MULTIPLY)
{
return (*left) * (*right);
}
else if ((*operation) == DIVIDE)
{
return (*left) / (*right);
}
else if ((*operation) == ADD)
{
return (*left) + (*right);
}
else if ((*operation) == SUBTRACT)
{
return (*left) - (*right);
}
else
{
return 0.0;
}
}
EDIT:
I first must say thank you for all of your kind posts. This is the first forum I've gotten people that don't tell me I'm a complete idiot. Sorry about the return self; I didn't realize this was an objective-C forum too (thus why I hastily used C). I have my own parser which is slow but I'm not concerned with its speed. All I want is to speed up the update() function since it slows everything down and 90% of the objects use it. Also, I'm try to get it to work faster with iOS devices since I can't compile anything in the text boxes. If you have any other advice on making update() faster I thank you.
Thanks again,
Jonathan
EDIT 2:
Well I got it to run faster by changing it from:
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 4; i++)
{
*mathVariable[i].equals = solution(*mathVariable[i].left, *mathVariable[i].right, mathVariable[i].operation);
}
To:
*mathVariable[0].equals = solution(*mathVariable[0].left, *mathVariable[0].right, mathVariable[0].operation);
*mathVariable[1].equals = solution(*mathVariable[1].left, *mathVariable[1].right, mathVariable[1].operation);
*mathVariable[2].equals = solution(*mathVariable[2].left, *mathVariable[2].right, mathVariable[2].operation);
*mathVariable[3].equals = solution(*mathVariable[3].left, *mathVariable[3].right, mathVariable[3].operation);
Is there any other way to increment it as fast as the preloaded numbers in the array like above?
Your code is a mix of styles, and contains some unwarranted uses of pointers (e.g. when passing operation to solution). It is unclear why you are passing the floats by reference, but maybe you intend that these change be changed and the expression reevaluated?
Below are some changes both to tidy and incidentally speed it up - the cost of any of this is not high and you may be guilt of premature optimization. As #Dave commented there are libraries to do parsing for you, but if you're targeting simple math expressions an operator precedence stack-based parser/evaluator is easy enough to code.
Suggestion 1: use enum - cleaner:
typedef enum { MULTIPLY, DIVIDE, ADD, SUBTRACT } BinaryOp;
typedef struct
{
float *left;
float *right;
float *equals;
BinaryOp operation;
} MathVariable;
Suggestion 2: use switch - cleaner and probably faster as well:
float solution(float left, float right, int operation)
{
switch(operation)
{
case MULTIPLY:
return left * right;
case DIVIDE:
return left / right;
case ADD:
return left + right;
case SUBTRACT:
return left - right;
default:
return 0.0;
}
}
Note I also removed passing pointers, the call is now:
*mathVariable[i].equals = solution(*mathVariable[i].left,
*mathVariable[i].right,
mathVariable[i].operation);
Now an OO person will probably object (:-)) to the switch (or the if/else) and argue each node (your MathVariable) should be an instance which knows how to perform its own operation. A C person might suggest you use function pointers in the node so they can perform their own operation. All this is design and you'll have to figure that out yourself.