Re: Circlemud design issues

From: Rob Baumstark (shirak@CONNECT.AB.CA)
Date: 04/20/98

Some more of my comments/suggestions on ... everything.

It would be nice sometimes, but weighing the advantages and disadvantages,
and the amount of work it would be both to add, and to keep two versions, I
don't think it would be worth it.

New Features:
> The version after 3.0 _may_or_may_not_ have any of the following:
> * ASCII pfiles
> * rewritten skill system
> * new buffer handling
> * better (but still very simple) OLC
If you are going to add ASCII pfiles, I would suggest leaving the current
binary code in as well (which I, and I think others like better), and let
the user choose by defining/undefining something in conf.h (or whatever

Some macros should probably be re-written into functions, such as
REMOVE_FROM_LIST, CAN_SEE, etc.  Others, such as GET_NAME, I believe should
be left as macros.  Using GET_NAME(ch) = "Something" is (I think) the best,
easiest, way to go, and probably also generates the fastest code when
compiled.  I wouldn't worry about type checking or anything here, as a
person could just go ch->name = "Something" just as easily to bypass any
type checks, and without C++ encapsulation, there is nothing you can do to
stop that.  And as I'll say below, I don't think going to C++ is a good

It's been written so far in C, and is designed for a structured
environment.  I think a change to C++ would be more of a change to another
code-base altogether.

Though it may not sound like it in my writing, these are just opinions, and
I'd like to hear back on them.
G:  "If we do happen to step on a mine, Sir, what do we do?"
EB: "Normal procedure, Lieutenant, is to jump 200 feet in
     the air and scatter oneself over a wide area."
-- Somewhere in No Man's Land, BA4
     Rob Baumstark:

     | Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ:  |
     | |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST