Why do you think using an INI is very inefficient for recording replays? Whether you're using INI or an array, you'll still have a crapload of data stored in a file somewhere. An array might be slightly smaller, but that's all. Attempting to record the values of every object 50 times a second was a pretty stupid decision. That was the inefficient part, I'd say.
I'm genuinely asking that question, not just trying to stir something up. If there's a better way to record sequential data then I'd love to hear about it.
DaVince This fool just HAD to have a custom rating
Registered 04/09/2004
Points 7998
18th July, 2007 at 09:58:26 -
I'll correct some common misconeptions here.
- Filenames can be as long as the file system allows you to. This also depends on how many subdirectories you are in. If you're in C: the limit is close to 256 characters (if I remember correctly).
- File sizes have the limit of the maximum file size of the file system. This is a few hundred gigabytes in Linux with ext3 formatted partitions, and I forgot what it was in NTFS (but I think it's a few dozens of gigabytes too).
EDIT: Nim, if you're dealing with lots of data, don't use groups and keys which take up pretty much in a file. Use bytes, which will be much more efficient in this case (only one or two characters of a file to put down a value, instead of a few for the group, then a line break, then some more for the id and value).
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by the Author.