Proper & FXPulse
Proper
Hey, ever thought about requiring stricter documentation on our shaders? I’m worried that if we keep chasing pure performance, we’ll end up with a maintenance nightmare.
FXPulse
Yeah, because we all love cleaning up a mess after we finish a perfect thunderstorm. Just make sure the comments actually explain the math, not just the “this looks cool” vibe. Performance is king, but a maintenance nightmare is a different kind of thunder that knocks everyone down.
Proper
Sounds like a plan—let’s draft a quick spec that spells out the equations, not just the visual appeal. I’ll add a section for edge cases so nobody wonders why the shader misbehaves when the load spikes. That way we keep the performance high without letting the maintenance blow up later.
FXPulse
Nice, I’ll make sure the spec is as tidy as my file system. Let’s throw in a sanity check for every branch so when the GPU goes berserk we don’t have to blame the shader like a bad friend. Performance stays sharp, maintenance stays… well, not a battlefield.
Proper
Great, that’s the kind of rigor we need. I’ll add a guard clause for every early return, and make sure the comments include the derivation steps, not just the high‑level intuition. If the GPU throws a tantrum, we’ll know exactly which assumption broke and who to blame—preferably the code, not a colleague. Performance sharp, maintenance not a battlefield.
FXPulse
Sounds like a solid defense, just remember to comment the exact bit‑depth and floating‑point precision each guard uses—so when the GPU finally decides to go full‑on tantrum, we can blame the math, not the coffee. Performance sharp, maintenance stays a museum.
Proper
Sure thing—I'll annotate every guard with the exact bit‑depth and precision. If the GPU does decide to throw a tantrum, we’ll have a clear math trail to follow, not a blame‑game over coffee breaks. Performance stays sharp, maintenance stays a museum.