We Keep Coding

Can't set delay in libgdx

I want to remove an index from an array after some time, I want it to fall, then delete it.
private final int gravity = 4;
private long lifeTime=0;
private long delay = 20000L;
public void objGravity() {
while (array.get(array.size - 1).y > 0)
array.get(array.size - 1).y -= gravity;
lifeTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
lifeTime += Gdx.graphics.getDeltaTime();
if (lifeTime > delay) {
array.removeIndex(array.size - 1);
lifeTime = 0;
}
}
The object gets removed from array immediately as if there's no delay whatsoever, so it doesn't appear to be falling down on the screen.
Update
I removed time and so on. I added a counter to count how many objects need to be removed and then I do a loop that removes array.size-1 as long as counter>0.
Not sure if it's the best approach, seems like a hack but I don't want to do threads on old mobile phones. If you have a better idea please share

Don't fire threads inside the render method, it's not safe, can cause thread leaks, a lot of other problems and will be harder to maintain your code, to handle time use a variable adding delta time every time render is called, when this variable is superior a 1.0f means that one second has passed, your code would be something like this:
private float timeSeconds = 0f;
private float period = 1f;
public void render() {
//Execute handleEvent each 1 second
timeSeconds +=Gdx.graphics.getRawDeltaTime();
if(timeSeconds > period){
timeSeconds-=period;
handleEvent();
}
[...]
}
public void handleEvent() {
[...]
}
To keep organized i personally have an array on my main game class that holds all my timed events and process everything on the render cycle.

Calculating time passed in libgdx with getDeltaTime()

i am trying to calculate the time passed in my libGDX application like this
float timeSpent= 0;
public void render(){
timeSpent = timeSpent + Gdx.graphics.getDeltaTime();
}
by the above code i feel like the time is almost passing double the normal rate
but if i get delta time directly from java's nano time method like this
float prevTime;
float timeSpent = 0;
public void show(){
prevTime = System.nanoTime();
}
public void render(){
float p = System.nanoTime();
timeSpent += (p-prevTime)/1000000000f;
prevTime = p;
}
it seems to work fine, i know that libgdx also get delta time from subtracting
nano time method.
i am not able to figure out what am i doing wrong in the first method.
thank you

You can calculate the passed time from the start of your application by simply saving a date when it starts, and just subtract it from the current date. No need to accumulate the deltas in each frame.
You can further simplify the code by using TimeUtils:
// save at start
long start = TimeUtils.millis();
// query whenever you want
long diffInMillis = TimeUtils.timeSinceMillis(startTime);

Java calculations that takes X amount of time

This is just a hypothetical question, but could be a way to get around an issue I have been having.
Imagine you want to be able to time a calculation function based not on the answer, but on the time it takes to calculating. So instead of finding out what a + b is, you wish to continue perform some calculation while time < x seconds.
Look at this pseudo code:
public static void performCalculationsForTime(int seconds)
{
// Get start time
int millisStart = System.currentTimeMillis();
// Perform calculation to find the 1000th digit of PI
// Check if the given amount of seconds have passed since millisStart
// If number of seconds have not passed, redo the 1000th PI digit calculation
// At this point the time has passed, return the function.
}
Now I know that I am horrible, despicable person for using precious CPU cycles to simple get time to pass, but what I am wondering is:
A) Is this possible and would JVM start complaining about non-responsiveness?
B) If it is possible, what calculations would be best to try to perform?
Update - Answer:
Based on the answers and comments, the answer seems to be that "Yes, this is possible. But only if it is not done in Android main UI thread, because the user's GUI will be become unresponsive and will throw an ANR after 5 seconds."

A) Is this possible and would JVM start complaining about non-responsiveness?
It is possible, and if you run it in the background, neither JVM nor Dalvik will complain.
B) If it is possible, what calculations would be best to try to perform?
If the objective is to just run any calculation for x seconds, just keep adding 1 to a sum until the required time has reached. Off the top of my head, something like:
public static void performCalculationsForTime(int seconds)
{
// Get start time
int secondsStart = System.currentTimeMillis()/1000;
int requiredEndTime = millisStart + seconds;
float sum = 0;
while(secondsStart != requiredEndTime) {
sum = sum + 0.1;
secondsStart = System.currentTimeMillis()/1000;
}
}

You can and JVM won't complain if your code is not part of some complex system that actually tracks thread execution time.
long startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
while(System.currentTimeMillis() - startTime < 100000) {
// do something
}
Or even a for loop that checks time only every 1000 cycles.
for (int i = 0; ;i++) {
if (i % 1000 == 0 && System.currentTimeMillis() - startTime < 100000)
break;
// do something
}
As for your second question, the answer is probably calculating some value that can always be improved upon, like your PI digits example.

Updating and rendering for a 2D game in Java

So, I am working on making a 2D game in Java, and I really don't have too much experience with Java. I currently use a very simple loop using a swing timer running every 10ms or so that looks something like:
public void actionPerformed(ActionEvent e) {
update();
repaint();
}
However, I need something more practical for obvious reasons. These reasons include the fact that more lag means less FPS AND slower movement/other updating.
I found the following code in a tutorial for a 3D Java game here. It would begin running when the program starts, and I understand enough to know it would work. However, I do not fully understand it: (tick() is the updater, render() renders the screen)
long currenttime;
long previoustime = System.nanoTime();
long passedtime;
int frames = 0;
double unprocessedseconds = 0;
double secondspertick = 1 / 60.0;
int tickcount = 0;
boolean ticked = false;
while (gameIsRunning) {
currenttime = System.nanoTime();
passedtime = currenttime - previoustime;
previoustime = currenttime;
unprocessedseconds += passedtime / 1000000000.0;
while (unprocessedseconds > secondspertick) {
tick();
unprocessedseconds -= secondspertick;
ticked = true;
tickcount++;
System.out.println(tickcount);
if (tickcount % 60 == 0) {
System.out.println(frames + " FPS");
previoustime += 1000;
frames = 0;
}
}
if (ticked) {
render();
frames++;
}
render();
frames++;
}
This code was not explained in the tutorial I found it in. Could someone please break this down and explain it?
I have also looked here for ideas, and the final piece of code on that page with a render thread and an update thread makes a lot of sense to me.
Which method should I use? One of the above, or something totally different? Also, you can probably tell that this is my first question here on stackoverflow.
Thanks in advance,
Josh

tick() is probably updating the game object's physical properties (position, velocity, etc.) tick() is called multiple times each update because some simulations can't handle too large a timestep without becoming unstable.
There's a popular article online which explains why this is the case, and why using a fixed timestep is the proper procedure. Check it out.
Each update the game is advanced in 1/60th second (so 60 frames a second) increments. This is repeated until there's less than 1/60th a second remaining in the aggregate. Aggregate is just a fancy word for sum.
Then a snapshot of the game's current state is rendered to the screen.
I won't get too deep into it, but really this code should be inerpolating each object's position by the remaining time in the aggregate during render().
long currenttime;
long previoustime = System.nanoTime();
long passedtime;
int frames = 0;
//this is an aggregate, games usually step in fixed units of time.
//this is usually because physics simulations can't handle too large of time steps.
double unprocessedseconds = 0;
double secondspertick = 1 / 60.0;
int tickcount = 0;
boolean ticked = false;
while (gameIsRunning) {
//get elapsed nano seconds from the epoch (january 1st, 1970)
currenttime = System.nanoTime();
//take difference of current time in nanos and previous time in nanos
passedtime = currenttime - previoustime;
previoustime = currenttime;
//divide to get the elapsed time in seconds.
unprocessedseconds += passedtime / 1000000000.0;
while (unprocessedseconds > secondspertick) {
tick();
unprocessedseconds -= secondspertick;
ticked = true;
tickcount++;
System.out.println(tickcount);
if (tickcount % 60 == 0) {
System.out.println(frames + " FPS");
previoustime += 1000;
frames = 0;
}
}
if (ticked) {
render();
frames++;
}
render();
frames++;
}
Good luck Josh.
Edit:
I have no experience with games using one thread for updates, and one for rendering. I can't give advice on those for that reason. If you have little or no experience with multithreading I'd avoid it as only complex games are likely to require this approach, and multithreading will add a multitude of issues you probably don't want to deal with.
Multithreaded game engines will consume more memory between rendering and updating than a single threaded game, or will wind up being depend on one another anyway. This is because the two threads can't manipulate the same data simultaneously. Therefor the only way for the two threads to operate is with synchronization on those data structures, or by the update thread suppling the render thread with immutable data to render.
Writing a multithreaded game engine would be a good introduction to threading. It could teach you quite a lot. Depends on what you want to get out of this.
If you are making a 2D game I feel even more confident that you will not need one thread for updating and one for rendering.
If you really want to pursue this, here's the approach I'd take.
You don't need more than a while loop to control rendering.

The way I do my engines is just as explained before, I multi-thread. Basically, if you split the job of processing and drawing the game into two segments it becomes quicker at the expense of more resources in use. I do a little something like this:
public class Engine implements Runnable {
//Sets classes
Engine tick = new Engine(true);
Engine render = new Engine(false);
Thread tickThread = new Thread(tick);
Thread renderThread = new Thread(render);
boolean job;
boolean isRunning = false;
long sleepTime = 5L;
public Engine(boolean job) {
//Sets what the thread does
this.job = job;
}
public static void startEngine() {
//Starts Engine
isRunning = true;
tickThread.start();
renderThread.start();
}
public void tick() {
//Process things
}
public void render() {
//Draw things
}
public void run() {
//Do engine base things
while(isRunning) {
if(job) {
tick();
} else {
render();
}
Thread.sleep(sleepTime);
}
}
}
This is by no means advanced. This is just an example of what a simple multi-thread game engine would be like. Honestly, I used this exact code when I was starting off making games. This could be used but some adjustments should be made depending on what you use it for. What I mean is that lets say you have an object that's moving and its being rendered at the same time. If the objects position is 50 and increasing and the render method is drawing it then the object could go to 51 then 52 before being rendered again. Normally, the processing is faster than the drawing. Another example: Lets say you have an ArrayList and are constantly removing and adding objects to it. Sometimes you can remove an object just as the render method is about to draw it and cause a null pointer exception because it's trying to draw something that doesn't exist. (I used "if(object.get(i) != null)" and worked around it that way)
I hope this helped at least a little (two years later, lol) and helped you get a basis of what multi-threading is like (if you didn't already).

Attempting to create a stable game engine loop

I'm writing a fairly simple 2D multiplayer-over-network game. Right now, I find it nearly impossible for myself to create a stable loop. By stable I mean such kind of loop inside which certain calculations are done and which is repeated over strict periods of time (let's say, every 25 ms, that's what I'm fighting for right now). I haven't faced many severe hindrances this far except for this one.
In this game, several threads are running, both in server and client applications, assigned to various tasks. Let's take for example engine thread in my server application. In this thread, I try to create game loop using Thread.sleep, trying to take in account time taken by game calculations. Here's my loop, placed within run() method. Tick() function is payload of the loop. It simply contains ordered calls to other methods doing constant game updating.
long engFPS = 40;
long frameDur = 1000 / engFPS;
long lastFrameTime;
long nextFrame;
<...>
while(true)
{
lastFrameTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
nextFrame = lastFrameTime + frameDur;
Tick();
if(nextFrame - System.currentTimeMillis() > 0)
{
try
{
Thread.sleep(nextFrame - System.currentTimeMillis());
}
catch(Exception e)
{
System.err.println("TSEngine :: run :: " + e);
}
}
}
The major problem is that Thread.sleep just loves to betray your expectations about how much it will sleep. It can easily put thread to rest for much longer or much shorter time, especially on some machines with Windows XP (I've tested it myself, WinXP gives really nasty results compared to Win7 and other OS). I've poked around internets quite a lot, and result was disappointing. It seems to be fault of the thread scheduler of the OS we're running on, and its so-called granularity. As far as I understood, this scheduler constantly, over certain amount of time, checks demands of every thread in system, in particular, puts/awakes them from sleep. When re-checking time is low, like 1ms, things may seem smooth. Although, it is said that WinXP has granularity as high as 10 or 15 ms. I've also read that not only Java programmers, but those using other languages face this problem as well.
Knowing this, it seems almost impossible to make a stable, sturdy, reliable game engine. Nevertheless, they're everywhere.
I'm highly wondering by which means this problem can be fought or circumvented. Could someone more experienced give me a hint on this?

Don't rely on the OS or any timer mechanism to wake your thread or invoke some callback at a precise point in time or after a precise delay. It's just not going to happen.
The way to deal with this is instead of setting a sleep/callback/poll interval and then assuming that the interval is kept with a high degree of precision, keep track of the amount of time that has elapsed since the previous iteration and use that to determine what the current state should be. Pass this amount through to anything that updates state based upon the current "frame" (really you should design your engine in a way that the internal components don't know or care about anything as concrete as a frame; so that instead there is just state that moves fluidly through time, and when a new frame needs to be sent for rendering a snapshot of this state is used).
So for example, you might do:
long maxWorkingTimePerFrame = 1000 / FRAMES_PER_SECOND; //this is optional
lastStartTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
while(true)
{
long elapsedTime = System.currentTimeMillis() - lastStartTime;
lastStartTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
Tick(elapsedTime);
//enforcing a maximum framerate here is optional...you don't need to sleep the thread
long processingTimeForCurrentFrame = System.currentTimeMillis() - lastStartTime;
if(processingTimeForCurrentFrame < maxWorkingTimePerFrame)
{
try
{
Thread.sleep(maxWorkingTimePerFrame - processingTimeForCurrentFrame);
}
catch(Exception e)
{
System.err.println("TSEngine :: run :: " + e);
}
}
}
Also note that you can get greater timer granularity by using System.nanoTime() in place of System.currentTimeMillis().

You may getter better results with
LockSupport.parkNanos(long nanos)
altho it complicates the code a bit compared to sleep()

maybe this helps you.
its from david brackeen's bock developing games in java
and calculates average granularity to fake a more fluent framerate:
link
public class TimeSmoothie {
/**
How often to recalc the frame rate
*/
protected static final long FRAME_RATE_RECALC_PERIOD = 500;
/**
Don't allow the elapsed time between frames to be more than 100 ms
*/
protected static final long MAX_ELAPSED_TIME = 100;
/**
Take the average of the last few samples during the last 100ms
*/
protected static final long AVERAGE_PERIOD = 100;
protected static final int NUM_SAMPLES_BITS = 6; // 64 samples
protected static final int NUM_SAMPLES = 1 << NUM_SAMPLES_BITS;
protected static final int NUM_SAMPLES_MASK = NUM_SAMPLES - 1;
protected long[] samples;
protected int numSamples = 0;
protected int firstIndex = 0;
// for calculating frame rate
protected int numFrames = 0;
protected long startTime;
protected float frameRate;
public TimeSmoothie() {
samples = new long[NUM_SAMPLES];
}
/**
Adds the specified time sample and returns the average
of all the recorded time samples.
*/
public long getTime(long elapsedTime) {
addSample(elapsedTime);
return getAverage();
}
/**
Adds a time sample.
*/
public void addSample(long elapsedTime) {
numFrames++;
// cap the time
elapsedTime = Math.min(elapsedTime, MAX_ELAPSED_TIME);
// add the sample to the list
samples[(firstIndex + numSamples) & NUM_SAMPLES_MASK] =
elapsedTime;
if (numSamples == samples.length) {
firstIndex = (firstIndex + 1) & NUM_SAMPLES_MASK;
}
else {
numSamples++;
}
}
/**
Gets the average of the recorded time samples.
*/
public long getAverage() {
long sum = 0;
for (int i=numSamples-1; i>=0; i--) {
sum+=samples[(firstIndex + i) & NUM_SAMPLES_MASK];
// if the average period is already reached, go ahead and return
// the average.
if (sum >= AVERAGE_PERIOD) {
Math.round((double)sum / (numSamples-i));
}
}
return Math.round((double)sum / numSamples);
}
/**
Gets the frame rate (number of calls to getTime() or
addSample() in real time). The frame rate is recalculated
every 500ms.
*/
public float getFrameRate() {
long currTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
// calculate the frame rate every 500 milliseconds
if (currTime > startTime + FRAME_RATE_RECALC_PERIOD) {
frameRate = (float)numFrames * 1000 /
(currTime - startTime);
startTime = currTime;
numFrames = 0;
}
return frameRate;
}
}