Return to “Scripting & Modding”

Post

Re: LTSL - The LT script language

#76
Soranya wrote:As someone mantioned before most people who will write Stuff are not Hardcore Programmers and keeping things as close to "everyday" usage as possible will surely help getting things to work.
My personal response to things like that is: if that sort of notation is really that hard you're not going to do well at modding anyway which generally requires some abstract thinking to get where you want to go.

However in defence of your point I can mention that Haskell also chose prefer infix operators (a + b) rather than use prefix operators ( (+) a b ) exclusively, I'm not sure what kind of production time allowing both forms would eat but I'm guessing Haskell had a good reason to use both.
Interestingly for user-defined or non-operator functions they chose to make prefix (Foo a b) the default and infix (a `Foo` b) the special case.
woops, my bad, everything & anything actually means specific and conformed
Post

Re: LTSL - The LT script language

#77
etc wrote:
That isn't an in-engine editor (at least it doesn't appear to be) - that's Vim. Unless you're saying he's switched from Vim to something else...
Nobody claimed vim to be an in-game editor, its just a reference to colored syntax.

(It also cant be an in-game editor considering that these images from josh are from christmas right after the kickstarter.
Pre-Node-UI and stuff, really ancient)
Post

Re: LTSL - The LT script language

#78
Why make dealing with notation an "are you hardcore enough?" test?

The real question is, "why make modding Limit Theory any harder for people than it has to be?" There'll be plenty to learn without also making people adapt to a strange precedence grammar when that's not necessary.

Prefix notation (OPERATOR param1 param2) looks like functions. So people who think functional languages are awesome advocate prefix. It's familiar.

Postfix, AKA Reverse Polish Notation (param1 param2 OPERATOR), is easiest for a computer to parse because it uses stacks efficiently. So HP built RPN-based calculators that required people to think like computers.

Infix (param1 OPERATOR param2) looks like what's in the math books. Getting statements written in an infix grammar parsed means the compiler-writer has to do some extra work versus implementing prefix and postfix. But methods for implementing such grammars are not complicated, and have been around since before I was reading the Dragon Book.

I'm not sure why the authors of Haskell offered infix notation in addition to prefix notation. But I'll bet they got more people using that language because of that decision.
Post

Re: LTSL - The LT script language

#79
Cornflakes_91 wrote:
etc wrote:
That isn't an in-engine editor (at least it doesn't appear to be) - that's Vim. Unless you're saying he's switched from Vim to something else...
Nobody claimed vim to be an in-game editor, its just a reference to colored syntax.

(It also cant be an in-game editor considering that these images from josh are from christmas right after the kickstarter.
Pre-Node-UI and stuff, really ancient)
:(

You obviously got me wrong - I was imagining a cool idea for Mr Parnell to possibly consider to help with reiteration.. the idea that the LT itself, whilst utilising LTSL, could have the possibility of utilising it's own coloured syntactically correct, in-game editor.
Considering that Josh is able to edit scripts and refresh the game engine at present, would it not be possible to all such functionality in-game?

Obviously I am making Cornflakes confused, so can Talvieno please interpret for me please?
*sigh*
YAY PYTHON \o/

In Josh We Trust
-=326.3827=-
Post

Re: LTSL - The LT script language

#81
Cornflakes_91 wrote:*syntax recognition in an LT internal editor which provides coloring, automated intendation etc for LTSL scripting.

I think i got you moss, im just bad with words myself :lol:
Woot, thanks Josh - you made my day.
{LT Dev Update #19 @ 16mins 20 secs}


Granted, modifying LT to look at a specific directory to modify scripts and not cause a stack overflow (or other interesting error messages) is key.
And yes, I know it's outside the scope of your current tasklist.

But it would be so cool if possible :)

Have a wonderful relaxing day.

:clap: :thumbup: :D :mrgreen:
YAY PYTHON \o/

In Josh We Trust
-=326.3827=-
Post

Re: LTSL - The LT script language

#83
Ulthuan wrote:While there is a lot of debate about the specific syntactic choices that have been made with LTSL, I'm most curious to know why an off the shell solution wasn't used. There are plenty of options for either embedded interpreters or languages that will compile to native.
Welcome to the forums! :wave:

There's a related topic about your question here: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=3364
Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

cron