AngelScript: The Revenge

[Grayswandir]

You seem to be deliberately taking what I said out of context. Anyone with relevant points or questions on the subject of this thread are not something I would(or have) take issue with. The fact that it evolved into whining and bickering about things that have already been covered is what is getting irksome. As most certainly the portion of DD's post you quoted has been covered. Not with absolute certainty, but nothing is certain right now.

What exactly did I take out of context? I assure you, there were no "deliberate" misunderstandings on my part. I skimmed the thread and everything seemed (reasonably) on topic to me. (At least, it was as on topic as your constant incitement to kill ZScript or whatever.)

What is the MAJOR problem? The array thing? People will have to update their broken scripts that will be unsupported because of their stupid, awful code. How is that an issue? Solution: Don't code bad. (I code bad all the time but.... TRY DON'T CODE BAD!)

Around half of all extant scripts breaking is a pretty big problem, yes. I mean, I personally don't care that much, but ZC seems to be pretty big on backward compatibility in general. And it's not "bad code". It's the best way to emulate pointers in the crappy ZScript syntax. You can work around it, yes, but for any non-trivial examples, doing so introduces so much more complexity that the "bad" syntax is more than compensated for.

Gleeok has stated what he is doing. I don't think Gleeok explains things. If you want to know exactly what he is doing you will have to just jump in and try to figure it out. As I am doing. Well, I haven't actually spent very much time doing it because of school and work.

Well, certainly, he doesn't have to. I just thought that some sort of update would be useful. I still don't know what the final plan is, aside from "AS is being added." Plenty of different options have been discussed, but I haven't seen anything definite, only words along the lines of "everything will work fine."


Edit: See, that was pretty helpful. :) Thanks for the prompt response, @Gleeok .

[Tamamo]

Around half of all extant scripts breaking is a pretty big problem, yes. I mean, I personally don't care that much, but ZC seems to be pretty big on backward compatibility in general. And it's not "bad code". It's the best way to emulate pointers in the crappy ZScript syntax. You can work around it, yes, but for any non-trivial examples, doing so introduces so much more complexity that the "bad" syntax is more than compensated for. .

Okay we're done it's a limitation of ZScript's syntax that we're talking about here., which someone found a way to get around. THAT is the very definition of bad programming practice. If the head developer says its bad programming practice as @Gleeok already has. Then it's bad programming practice. End of discussion.
Now you and your zc.future posse can stop your flipping bickering at me and everyone else you are bickering at cause it's completely disrespectful.

Cool it, both of you.
-KA-

[SUCCESSOR]

Okay we're done it's a limitation of ZScript's syntax that we're talking about here., which someone found a way to get around. THAT is the very definition of bad programming practice. If the head developer says its bad programming practice as @Gleeok already has. Then it's bad programming practice. End of discussion.
Now you and your zc.future posse can stop your flipping bickering at me and everyone else you are bickering at cause it's completely disrespectful.

You are being equally disrespectful. You don't get to declare yourself right and command the discussion is terminated. This sort of post isn't helping the bickering.

Yes, my posts aren't exactly the posterchild of deescalation, but you have to read anything i write with a hint of sarcasm and a dash of levity... Or else I just sound like an asshole.

[Tamamo]

I'm not being disrespectful. And I do get to declare myself right. ummm... Yeah... Because I'm a woman, and woman are always right.
As for the second part of that equation... meh I'm done with these shenanigans the zc.future posse was the primary reason I left Development in the first place. Why i even thought about joining this warzone again is beyond me, because the posse and the official devs will never get along, that's always been apparent. And nobody seems to like a bitchy japanese woman whose pmsing so fuck it.

[SUCCESSOR]

What exactly did I take out of context? I assure you, there were no "deliberate" misunderstandings on my part. I skimmed the thread and everything seemed (reasonably) on topic to me. (At least, it was as on topic as your constant incitement to kill ZScript or whatever.)

Around half of all extant scripts breaking is a pretty big problem, yes. I mean, I personally don't care that much, but ZC seems to be pretty big on backward compatibility in general. And it's not "bad code". It's the best way to emulate pointers in the crappy ZScript syntax. You can work around it, yes, but for any non-trivial examples, doing so introduces so much more complexity that the "bad" syntax is more than compensated for.

Well, certainly, he doesn't have to. I just thought that some sort of update would be useful. I still don't know what the final plan is, aside from "AS is being added." Plenty of different options have been discussed, but I haven't seen anything definite, only words along the lines of "everything will work fine."


Edit: See, that was pretty helpful. :) Thanks for the prompt response, @Gleeok .

I didn't say, DON't TALK ABOUT ZS EVARRR! I said the discussion of it's hypothetical future, as in things that aren't in anyway certain yet weren't constructive or relevant. And yes, I do support AS replacing ZS. I have used ZS for over 5 years now and I would take anything over it.

Half of all extant scripts? You got a source on that? Last I heard, Gleeok *estimated* 98% compatibility with a conversion tool and DD stated keeping the interpreter for legacy quests so, 100% compatibility. Far off from 50%. And I have never seen that array thing in a script until Moosh posted that snippet so it can't be a significant chunk of extant code. And what does it work around? What limitation is it working around that can't be done in a safer way? Moosh's example came to personal preference.

There isnt a final plan. Gleeok is working on AS. That is the only plan on the matter. Until it becomes officially a part of the codebase then Zscript is still the official coding engine. As DD said, it makes sense if AS works out for it to replace ZS.

[Grayswandir]

I didn't say, DON't TALK ABOUT ZS EVARRR! I said the discussion of it's hypothetical future, as in things that aren't in anyway certain yet weren't constructive or relevant. And yes, I do support AS replacing ZS. I have used ZS for over 5 years now and I would take anything over it.

Well, that's more reasonable, I guess.

Half of all extant scripts? You got a source on that? Last I heard, Gleeok *estimated* 98% compatibility with a conversion tool and DD stated keeping the interpreter for legacy quests so, 100% compatibility. Far off from 50%. And I have never seen that array thing in a script until Moosh posted that snippet so it can't be a significant chunk of extant code. And what does it work around? What limitation is it working around that can't be done in a safer way? Moosh's example came to personal preference.

Like I said, ghost.zh uses that trick. I'd estimate that half of all scripts in use are ghost scripts. In any case, it's a big chunk of them. And I know several users who hack into their copy of the ghost library itself to fix perceived bugs, making it rather difficult for them to update to whatever new version fixes this issue. I'd estimate the workaround at around 50 lines of code.
In any case, I'd estimate that every recent moderately script heavy quest uses it somewhere or else. (Maybe not LaZ? That was mostly developed independent of everything else. I'd have to ask about that.)

As for what it's used for - like I said, it emulates pointers. So you can use it for whatever kinda thing you'd normally use pointers for. Ghost uses it to stuff 20 or so data values into a single npc->Misc slot. (That particular workaround is dynamically assigning an id in a dedicated global array. You're moving into psuedo-memory management at that point, though). I've used it for a malloc/free system, linked lists, hashmaps, etc. (Though I haven't really released anything...)

[SUCCESSOR]

Well, that's more reasonable, I guess.


Like I said, ghost.zh uses that trick. I'd estimate that half of all scripts in use are ghost scripts. In any case, it's a big chunk of them. And I know several users who hack into their copy of the ghost library itself to fix perceived bugs, making it rather difficult for them to update to whatever new version fixes this issue. I'd estimate the workaround at around 50 lines of code.
In any case, I'd estimate that every recent moderately script heavy quest uses it somewhere or else. (Maybe not LaZ? That was mostly developed independent of everything else. I'd have to ask about that.)

As for what it's used for - like I said, it emulates pointers. So you can use it for whatever kinda thing you'd normally use pointers for. Ghost uses it to stuff 20 or so data values into a single npc->Misc slot. (That particular workaround is dynamically assigning an id in a dedicated global array. You're moving into psuedo-memory management at that point, though). I've used it for a malloc/free system, linked lists, hashmaps, etc. (Though I haven't really released anything...)

All I saw in your quote of ghost.zh code was the passing of an array pointer. Not the abuse of ZS's wonky data type.