Unity Code Review - Refactoring Some Common Unity Mistakes 

Can we get a link to James' channel/@'s?

@@mysticvalley4566 0

00

@@mysticvalley4566 0

This link doesn't seem to be working for me

Pro tip: watch the 'clean coding' videos of Uncle Bob Martin and make yourself a better programmer in general. Far too few people take clean coding seriously, and if you're a coder, you should.. it will save you quite a few walls to run into. You're welcome 😀😁

Thanks for watching!

This is the beginner stuff..

Thank you for watching!

Nested indentations is harder to read them a flat structure. Though I agree about preferring positive cases whenever possible. You can also have the best of both worlds by extracting a new method with the contents of each nested if.

This is heavy in the editor only 😊 When doing development builds however, you can see error logs and hook up the console to the built application. But that's a separate thing.

I'll give it a shot in the next one!

Well lets think about what var does, it removes the name of the return type and replaces it with a shorter cleaner name. could that be confusing? definitely but a common rule with software is the smaller the scope the longer the variable names, it gets to the point where variables have SomeVeryLongNamesInCode to describe their jobs. the thing is though, variables are a 2-stage process. there is the "declaration" and the "assignment/initialization" usually this means you are effectively writing the name/type of the variable twice. Dog myDog = new Dog(), etc. so in one of the above examples: var force = RandomForceVector(); we are writing the word vector... just doing it once, not twice. Var can be confusing if you have no reference visually to what type is. but is usually fine if you do. Lastly personally I don't worry about var because we live in a world of very powerful editors, and you can always hover over a var to see its "real" type, but in most cases you don't need an extra 3-4 words per variable at all times. var massively shortens your code and with vs or rider, you can literally press one keyboard shortcut on it to revert to a fully qualified name. TL;DR the goal of 'clean' code is readability. in my opinion I try to remove as many words from my code that do not add useful information to the person reading it, and if I named my variables well enough they should not need to know what the type is to read or use my code. even if they do.. its not gone, its one editor click away

Yes, always remove empty Update functions if you do not use them.

I'm not sure I also want this answer. I would never do this but as far as I know, there are no benefits for performance because the update is a method from the monobehavior and its directly called from the parent :) Hope someone will answer so I get the notification :)

@@mehmedcavas3069 Back then I worked on something that involves on instantiating grid tiles on a level, like about 50x30 grids, with the grid prefab having a MonoBehaviour script in it. At first after everything's done I got pretty low FPS but it turns out that leaving the Update() method even though I'm not using it just because I don't know better is the cause, removing it makes the game buttery smooth again. In summary, remove Update() method indeed when not using it, hope this answers it!

Are you sure? Every class which ingerits monobehaviour goes through the unity life cycle right?

@@Aditya-us1qn unity creates a list of all objects that has update, lateUpdate or fixedUpdate...and then runs through it every frame...meaning even if its empty, it's still added to the list... So yea...if u don't put it in the script, it won't be added to the list...

Yes, it is still worth doing. blog.collectivemass.com/2019/06/unity-myth-buster-gameobject-transform-vs-cached-transform/

If you cache it yourself, yes it is slightly faster but you could do that for other unity objects too. You don't have to and that's why unity allows transform. now

You can change what is auto generated, they talk about that

The transform's position and rotation

Nope! docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/language-reference/keywords/this

Nope, it's implied.

You can write your own test code, that catched transform is a little bit faster than internal.

I miss that guy