SOLVED Is there any limit to the amount of included files you can have in a GM2 project?

[otterZ]

Is there any limit to the amount of included files you can have in a GM2 project that is geared to being played on a Windows PC via Steam?

I would guess that there is no limit?

The reason I'm asking is that my latest project hit the 2GB RAM limit and I had to re-order the project to externally load images and sound. It took a lot of work . . . and has given me a kind of post-traumatic RAM limit syndrome lol - as now I'm illogically worried about hitting an imagined 'included files' limit in GM2 - which no doubt probably doesn't even exist (hopefully).

Obviously, there is a point where adding too many included files would become impractical - as in if 2TB were added lol, as obviously Steam would freak out and no-one would download it. I'm talking here of a GM2 project of about 5 GB in size.

 

[rytan451]

Included files are included in the program directory of your compiled game, and are not loaded into RAM. There should be little to no limitations on the number and size of the included files, excluding limits imposed by the storage medium or format.

In the unlikely event that your game will be installed on a FAT32 formatted partition, an individual included file may not reach the size of 4 GiB (FAT32 can only store files up to the size of 2^32 - 1 bytes, or 4,294,967,295 bytes). Many USB thumb drives are formatted in FAT32, and users may wish to install the game on a USB drive. Thus, it may be desirable to avoid including files which meets or exceeds 4 GiB in size.

In short: there is likely no number or size limitations on included files. It is desirable to keep individual files smaller than 4 GiB.

 

[otterZ]

Thank you rytan451, that's great. It's good to know that I won't have an imagined error popping up for an included file memory limit.

I feel my post-traumatic-2-GB-RAM memory limit syndrome slipping away now thanks to your answer I feel much more relaxed about adding extra material to my project now, externally.

That was interesting about the 4 GB included file limit on FAT32 formatted partitions, I didn't know about that and it is an interesting and useful fact.

Much appreciated.

 

[kburkhart84]

That was interesting about the 4 GB included file limit on FAT32 formatted partitions, I didn't know about that and it is an interesting and useful fact.

FAT(32) is an extremely old system. At that time, 4GB felt like 4TB does now...like you would never even get close to that size in a single file so it was irrelevant. The original FAT design was released in like 1977 I think, and then FAT32 was released in 1996...24 years is a really long time when you discuss computer technology. Its surprising how common it is today that USB drives are still formatted to FAT32...I had it understood that modern OSs can now read each other's data, unlike before. I may be wrong on that part though.

 

[otterZ]

It amazes me how fundamental systems from the 70s like FAT design, C programming language (for example) and DOS still underpin a lot of modern systems. Even GML looks like it is built on top of C++, which was built upon the C language, which was built from Assembly via Unix. I may be wrong, as I'm not trained in programming / computer science professionally but it kind of reminds me of Jenga, where the bottom blocks still command the stability of the structures above them.

 

[kburkhart84]

It amazes me how fundamental systems from the 70s like FAT design, C programming language (for example) and DOS still underpin a lot of modern systems. Even GML looks like it is built on top of C++, which was built upon the C language, which was built from Assembly via Unix. I may be wrong, as I'm not trained in programming / computer science professionally but it kind of reminds me of Jenga, where the bottom blocks still command the stability of the structures above them.

I don't think you are wrong...it makes sense to me. Assembly is pretty different from C, but in general, besides some languages that purposefully do things different, languages of the same "level" tend to have plenty of similarities, just often different wording/syntax.