HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
id-Software
DOOM-3-BFG
C++2012–2024
id-Software / DOOM-3-BFG

DOOM-3-BFG

Doom 3 BFG Edition

Games & Emulation
Explore on GitHubRead Hacker News discussions
17Distinct people
18Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
5.4KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Doom 3 BFG Edition

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 8–Nov 15 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/15/2026, 3:30:57 AM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year18 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2012-11-26 20:56:32 UTC to 2024-05-29 07:31:34 UTC.

02462012-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 6 mentions; 2 submissions, 4 comments20122013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 1 submissions, 1 comments2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 0 submissions, 3 comments2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments20182019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2024

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20122012-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC624
20132013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20142014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC211
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC303
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202

What Hacker News says

2 sources
nadams·Sep 19, 2015
> Garbage collection isn't a very good solution. I clearly didn't say it was. > They're often implemented poorly (the only good one being Go's) and they're slow. Do you have any evidence to support that? From my experiences and tests C# has been on par with C++ [1]. Of course it might be slightly slower but not enough for me to dismiss it. Java I think is a little bit slower - but my problem with Java is its memory requirements. > Garbage collection also necessitates a runtime environment to keep track of the data. Assuming they do this in a separate thread and you have an OS that schedules threads/processes in a sane way and the GC doesn't need to interact with the main thread - you should never notice a performance hit in your application. > What is not smart about smart pointers? They don't track the actual memory usage. John Carmack i
Read the rest
mplemented his own version of memory management for both Doom 3 [2] and Doom 3 BFG [3] presumably so he could get debugging information that isn't available with the C++11 smart pointers. I've implemented something similar to Doom 3's heap where I track the line and file of where the heap memory was allocated. The one thing I've noticed about developers today is that they have become lazy. Yeah - smart pointers will work correctly in simple cases and 90-99% of the time but it was written by humans so it may have bugs in it. Most C++ developers today refuse to run valgrind because they just assume their program doesn't leak memory when using shared_ptr/unique_ptr. I have personally found memory leaks in pretty popular open source projects. I would have told them about it - but I've found most C++ communities to not welcome new people and their ideas. [1] http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/212856/Head-to-head-benc... [2] https://github.com/TTimo/doom3.gpl/blob/8047099afdfc5c973faa... [3] https://github.com/id-Software/DOOM-3-BFG/blob/9c37079c16015...
In C++ Core Guidelines

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.