Re: Re[2]: The PerfectMUD? Just an opinion

From: Steve Moret (
Date: 10/31/96

On Thu, 31 Oct 1996, Jeremy Elson wrote:

> > administrator want non-saving aliases?  Isn't one of the first things 
> > everybody does is put in the saved alias patch?

No, I wrote my own because I didn't like the way Circle did aliases/didn't
save them, but I did not put in the patch.

> The whole point of the CircleMUD project was to include features that 
> *everyone* agrees are standard, so that imps can spend their time coding 
> something new.  If there are completely de-factor standard "stock" things 
> that everyone agrees should be in Circle, then I'll probably add them -- 
> as long as they do not violate the "stockness" of the base.

I thought the idea was to make a "blank slate" mud, for Imps to put their
own stuff in, while not having to worry about bugs in the current code.
I don't see much else that should be tweaked about circle (except for the
etext system, which is planned for bpl12?) OLCs cant be standard, unless you
put in #defines to have any of the many types (menu based, command based,
none at all, etc) I think the new improved editor patch, should be looked at
(evaluated, text editing can break a lot of things, and introduce a lot of
memory problems) and possibly added, but definatly stay away from the
creative aspects of code adding (races, more classes, spells, skills, etc)

Steve Moret

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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/18/00 PST