安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文(繁体中文)
日本語(日语)
한국어(韩语)
ไทย(泰语)
български(保加利亚语)
Čeština(捷克语)
Dansk(丹麦语)
Deutsch(德语)
English(英语)
Español-España(西班牙语 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希腊语)
Français(法语)
Italiano(意大利语)
Bahasa Indonesia(印度尼西亚语)
Magyar(匈牙利语)
Nederlands(荷兰语)
Norsk(挪威语)
Polski(波兰语)
Português(葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙)
Português-Brasil(葡萄牙语 - 巴西)
Română(罗马尼亚语)
Русский(俄语)
Suomi(芬兰语)
Svenska(瑞典语)
Türkçe(土耳其语)
Tiếng Việt(越南语)
Українська(乌克兰语)
报告翻译问题









Lastly, note that it's unreasonable to expect mods to perform under some arbitrary limit all the time. If you used a lot of things from GlitterNet then it may well take over 5ms on average to compute some ticks because ultimately there's a minimum set of code that GlitterNet needs to execute to actually work. I've done pretty much everything I could to pare that minimum set to the true minimum, but at some point the only thing I can do to make it perform better is to start to make it not work.
First of all, when you say you saw a 5ms "response", are you talking about average or max time? If it's max, then what you recorded is most likely a garbage collector cycle occurring during a GlitterNet function. if it's average, then there's a problem and I'll need at the very least a screenshot of the analyzer showing what method is acting up and a description of the scenario under which the performance issue occurred.