ASCII vs. Binary pfiles

From: Mike Breuer (
Date: 04/04/01

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Ajamian" <peter@PAJAMIAN.DHS.ORG>
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 5:03 AM

> Anyone want to comment on this one?  ASCII vs. binary pfiles.  I am
> probably in the minority, but I tend to prefer binary because (AFAIK)
> they load in faster and easier (no parsing necessary).  Also, there is a
> space consideration with ASCII which takes up lots more room plus wastes
> more space by storing each player's data in a seperate file (thus taking
> up directory space and wasted space to fill to the sector boundry on
> disk).

My take on it is that I prefer ASCII because on my system I don't have any
issues with storage space, and writing a parser is no trouble for me either.
As to loading faster, since the files aren't constantly being loaded while
the MUD is running, I don't have any major concerns there.

The reason I like them is that they are more flexible...I can make complex
changes to player stats/variable sizes, etc. without having to write a
conversion program.  I can also eliminate the "spare" variables in the
player_special_data_saved structure, thus reducing the memory footprint (as
long as we're talking about performance).  All that being said, I have
plenty of RAM, and so far I have been able to rename the spare variables
whenever I've needed to add a I am not practicing what I am
preaching here.  :-)


   | FAQ: |
   | Archives: |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/05/01 PST