Re: [CODE] [IDEA] Binary Object/Room files

From: Christopher Avans (parka@CDC.NET)
Date: 10/23/98

On Fri, 23 Oct 1998, Chris Jacobson wrote:

> On 10/23/98 8:40 PM, Andrew (object@ALPHALINK.COM.AU) stated:
> >Anyone thought of implementing binary room/object files, like the playerfile?
> >There are heaps of advantages that I can think of, for example speed,
> >effeciency,
> >no chance of not putting in the '~', infinite flags (within reason), and it's
> >easy to change the structure of the object/room files, and heaps more...
> There are more disadvantages:
> stuck with format (cannot change once implemented, contrary to what you
> said),

Converter. no more needs said

> limited string length (would cause an excess of space to be used also)
> flags NOT infinite, see first remark
> As for the heaps more advantages, there aren't.  Thats why no MUD today

There are alot of advantages, ALOT.

> uses binary room/object files, and why ascii pfiles are more popular than
> binary pfiles.

They are easier for beginners, and invcluded in most stock ***MUDS
For one we run them. They Will cut down on the strain on a box ALOT.
You will not notice the diffrence really for a small mud. A small mud
less than 10k rooms and/or less than 50 online 24/7. But if you wish to be
more than this one day It is the way to go. Then again you could wait till
then to imp them. Doing so will reduce possible need of a converter...

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

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