View Single Post
Old 03-18-2009, 11:28 PM   #45
locke
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Home MUD: nimud.divineright.org 5333
Posts: 195
locke is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Revolutionary New OLC and Scripting

No, you've misread that. I was saying that these messages prove The Isles OLC was originally written for a version of Merc (probably 2.0b or c) that was not 2.2 since it was already developed in September 1993 and therefore could not have been written for Merc 2.2 until Merc 2.2 came out.

Regardless of that, I'm telling you, as one of the authors, that yes indeed we started with a version of Merc prior to 2.2 - this is apparent from the r.g.m.d and from my own recollection, since I remember updating OLC to work with 2.2 shortly before the code was released.

No, I do not think DG scripts is based on NIMScripts for crying out loud!

Nah I'm not yet convinced that it has some radical feature that is somehow "worlds beyond" NiMScripts. I don't know what you mean by "Truly OO" but the level of functionality I've acheived with NIMScripts is already adequate for the job. It seems like you've turned back on your statement that you weren't trying to do a d!ck comparison between NIMScripts and DG, and instead have brought in this "unavailable" LexiScripts to start attacking me.

The one change I would make if I cared would be to use this.that, but I've done it another way. It's truly arbitrary and not something I'm interested in wasting my time with. I can do anything I want in NIMScripts already, though occaisionally I do see a need to add a function here or there. Also, I've never bothered to use my extended data types in the language, even though I spent time programming them. Those functions are very MUSH-like / LISP-like, and could be used to traverse various lists and/or trees and/or multi dimensional arrays stored in variables.

Instead of %actor.name% it's name(%actor%), big deal. It wouldn't take long for me to add functionality there to do that . . . but I think it would only further confuse matters.

You could write a combat system with NiMScripts, but its not something I've done because I already have a combat system in the mud. You must only be basing these assertions off my statements, instead of actually thinking about what NiMScripts does. Of course using the NIMScripts to make combat is not difficult, in fact, NIMScripts already augments the combat system, so one could assume that you would be able to write the whole combat system, even though this would be duplicating work since Diku already comes with a combat system. It would be far easier and more efficient NOT to use an interpreted language for the combat system, since that is a performance sensitive part of the MUD. That doesn't, however, mean it couldn't be done.

Some of the combat-related functions are heal(), hurt(), bomb(), healall(), elude(), setposition(), setkarma(), foe(), has(), check() and skill(), for example. I suppose you could also include things like maxhits(), str(), int(), etc.. also the bonus() function.

Part of my argument for it being the best is because of the live debugger and other features. But if you're here just to one-up me, stick it in your rear instead.

Last edited by locke : 03-19-2009 at 01:01 AM.
locke is offline   Reply With Quote