From: Sammy (
Date: 08/19/00

From: "Patrick Dughi" <dughi@IMAXX.NET>
Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2000 4:46 PM

>         I agree that java should be used.  Problem is that I'm not as
> savvy with java as I am with MFC (which I'm not as good with as the API,
> which I'm also not as good with as C...).  Poor knowledge of java 1.1,
> much less 1.2, with swing is kinda annoying.

I'm not very good with Java either, but it's much easier for me to understand
than MFC or the API.  I would strongly recommend sticking with the 1.1 Java
standard, since 1.2/swing would make it pretty unportable until MS decides to
support it.  The Java mailing lists I subscribe to are full of stories of Java
_developers_ who have trouble installing the swing runtime environment.

>         Even though, as a rule, I hate java. *kicks java in the nads*

My main interest in it is that 1.1 is so universally supported right now.
Most other portable code environments require the user to install a runtime
environment, but it seems every computer supports Java nowadays.

>         Letsee.. we could include in our configuration file a default
> window size, as well as a per-module setting of initial x-y coordinates
> for the top left corner.  That would allow an easy setup.  If you wanted
> to be complex, you could even take the modules and seperate them in their
> own group box which is then movable by anyone using the editor (I'd assume
> it'd be a toggle so you don't do it by accident).

Makes sense.

>         Writing any sort of text parser isn't too hard, though if you want
> to build something really complex, I suggest you look at either "Modern
> compiler implementation in c" by Appel, or "Writing compilers and
> interpreters" by Mak.  In most cases though, the design is so much more
> important than the implementation.  I'll work on something based off your
> inital form.

Strangely enough, I have yet to add a compiler design manual to my library.  I
may have to buy another bookcase first.  My books are already two-deep on
almost every shelf in every (7 or 8?) case.  I think I would have a much
easier time writing the interpreter than coming up with a good design.  My
chosen plan of attack was to do the rough draft script, then rough code the
gui using hard-coded data, then see what makes sense and what needs work,

>         I don't know that I'd want to have to duplicate the .rc file, for
> example, but pulling this out of the rc file....

That's not as bad as I feared.  Maybe we could expect people to use a dialog
editor (there must be free ones) to set it up.

>         I suppose I could work on the scripting aspect, since I actually
> know how to do that.  Half of my motiviation though is to try something
> new, and that'd be the GUI aspect.  So, I'd rather help with the interface
> in both java and MFC.  I suppose the first step is figuring out how to
> read in the config files. Er. second. Design first. :)

Design first, code second, redesign third, etc...

I'll move my Java books to the front of the queue and see if I can make
something work to start with.  It'll probably be a while since I recently got
married and don't have a whole lot of coding time.


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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 04/11/01 PDT