MUD Builders and Areas

darmir · 04-23-2002, 09:42 AM

I am new to the building community. I am working with the new AIME codebase and wanted to know the main differences between the OLC of different codebases?
What type of features? How advanced are they?

funkalicious · 04-23-2002, 09:54 AM

Xanferious · 04-23-2002, 08:09 PM

each mud has its own differnt feel, and type of olc, some are modified to better help the builders, but LP muds are hardcoded all the way, but i still prefer rom 2.4 witch im using for my mud. but whats nice is a olc in color, staring at green all day hurts the eyes.

donalban · 04-24-2002, 10:32 AM

Not exactly true. I used an LP OLC once before. <wonders whatever happened to it> It was a simple little prog, less features than some I've seen for others. But, it definitely beat having to 'long-code' it.

Would anyone know of one? They're out there, most likely closely guarded too.

Neranz Laverani · 04-25-2002, 03:45 PM

Menu-driven editors are easier for newer builders and initial data entry. For initial data entry, all of the fields need to be checked and filled appropriately.

Command-line editors are a lot quicker. They are better for editing something after it has already been created.

I like having both on hand. I also like the ability to print out the descriptions of an area.

Perhaps we should restart the perfect editor thread. That was a fairly good conversation about editors.

Neranz Laverani, Seeker of Knowledge

melopene · 04-27-2002, 06:48 PM

I spent hours and hours trying to figure out how to make stuff with the AIME codebase. I had it running, I had it all set up.. but I couldn't do anything.

darmir · 04-29-2002, 12:07 PM

What kind of problems where you having? Was it compiling the code?
How long ago was it when you played with it? Slate has improved the code quite a bit in the last few months. Also some of the documentation was out of date on some of the functions for the trigger events.

Just remember this codebase is still in pre-alpha! It will be going to alpha stage in probably 2-3 months, in which, myself and another person will be working on a mud that will be using this codebase. We will be developing the world that will come with the code.

04-29-2002, 10:25 PM

Umm.. Read up! *chuckle* The driver for an LPMud is hardcoded all the way. The rest of the mud is not. It uses the LPC language, which is a semi-object-oriented programming language. The LPC files (/mud/lib/room/square.c) are compiled on the fly by the driver.

The driver is what runs the Mudlib which is written in LPC, and is not compiled (per se).

A good Definition
LPC is a small, object oriented type C language developed by Lars Pensjö for LP-MUD, a Multi-User Dungeon environment under many UNIX systems. Since the premise of this language is based on C, it contains many of the syntactical qualities of C, but also maintains a large set of functions capable of performing many actions inside the game. The objective is to begin to look at LPC as a way of creating objects, rather than specific items, so that new coders can begin to experience the way LPC actually works. Rooms, weapons, monsters, armor, and whatever creation you can think of, even yourself, are objects. LPC allows you to create, modify, delete, and reproduce these objects in almost any manner you choose.

It is because of the fact that they are not HARDCODED, and because they are so user-defineable and malleable that there is no OLC or Offline Creation that does justice. Although on my mud I wrote an excellent online creation module in pure LPC. It is my-mud specific though. I also wrote an offline builder for my wife in Visual Basic. It is my-mud specific though.

Kaylus@Solice
Sorry for Redundancy, Im tired

04-23-2002, 09:42 AM	#1
darmir Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 30	I am new to the building community. I am working with the new AIME codebase and wanted to know the main differences between the OLC of different codebases? What type of features? How advanced are they?

04-23-2002, 09:54 AM	#2
funkalicious Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: US of A Posts: 38

04-23-2002, 08:09 PM	#3
Xanferious Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: The Void Posts: 490	each mud has its own differnt feel, and type of olc, some are modified to better help the builders, but LP muds are hardcoded all the way, but i still prefer rom 2.4 witch im using for my mud. but whats nice is a olc in color, staring at green all day hurts the eyes.

04-24-2002, 10:32 AM	#4
donalban New Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Florida Posts: 9	Not exactly true. I used an LP OLC once before. <wonders whatever happened to it> It was a simple little prog, less features than some I've seen for others. But, it definitely beat having to 'long-code' it. Would anyone know of one? They're out there, most likely closely guarded too.

04-25-2002, 03:45 PM	#5
Neranz Laverani Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: The States Posts: 116	Menu-driven editors are easier for newer builders and initial data entry. For initial data entry, all of the fields need to be checked and filled appropriately. Command-line editors are a lot quicker. They are better for editing something after it has already been created. I like having both on hand. I also like the ability to print out the descriptions of an area. Perhaps we should restart the perfect editor thread. That was a fairly good conversation about editors. Neranz Laverani, Seeker of Knowledge

04-27-2002, 06:48 PM	#6
melopene Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Birmingham, AL Posts: 118	I spent hours and hours trying to figure out how to make stuff with the AIME codebase. I had it running, I had it all set up.. but I couldn't do anything.

04-29-2002, 12:07 PM	#7
darmir Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 30	What kind of problems where you having? Was it compiling the code? How long ago was it when you played with it? Slate has improved the code quite a bit in the last few months. Also some of the documentation was out of date on some of the functions for the trigger events. Just remember this codebase is still in pre-alpha! It will be going to alpha stage in probably 2-3 months, in which, myself and another person will be working on a mud that will be using this codebase. We will be developing the world that will come with the code.

04-29-2002, 10:25 PM	#8
kaylus1 Posts: n/a	Umm.. Read up! chuckle The driver for an LPMud is hardcoded all the way. The rest of the mud is not. It uses the LPC language, which is a semi-object-oriented programming language. The LPC files (/mud/lib/room/square.c) are compiled on the fly by the driver. The driver is what runs the Mudlib which is written in LPC, and is not compiled (per se). A good Definition LPC is a small, object oriented type C language developed by Lars Pensjö for LP-MUD, a Multi-User Dungeon environment under many UNIX systems. Since the premise of this language is based on C, it contains many of the syntactical qualities of C, but also maintains a large set of functions capable of performing many actions inside the game. The objective is to begin to look at LPC as a way of creating objects, rather than specific items, so that new coders can begin to experience the way LPC actually works. Rooms, weapons, monsters, armor, and whatever creation you can think of, even yourself, are objects. LPC allows you to create, modify, delete, and reproduce these objects in almost any manner you choose. It is because of the fact that they are not HARDCODED, and because they are so user-defineable and malleable that there is no OLC or Offline Creation that does justice. Although on my mud I wrote an excellent online creation module in pure LPC. It is my-mud specific though. I also wrote an offline builder for my wife in Visual Basic. It is my-mud specific though. Kaylus@Solice Sorry for Redundancy, Im tired

MUD Builders and Areas

O.L.C