-keyNOTdown(i)
 

sorry for being retarded.. i havent been doing any scripting for awhile but oh well!
how would i go about detecting when keys 0-4 were'nt being pushed?


im bored and rescripting movement system and i couldnt think of what to do so he just keeps doing the walk ani unstil i press 'a' XP

Well, there are a few ways to do it.

Probably the easiest way is to have a array for it, then run a loop and check the corrisponding key to see if it's pressed, if not, then set the variable to false or whoever you want to keep track of it.

NPC Code:

---

!keydown(#)

---

?

Why bother checking? var = keydown(index); works just fine

Rick's got the idea. :)

else if (!keydown(0)) set ani idle,;


i had this but it screws up the walk ani X_X

Well hell, I didn't even think of that.

well.. that's because your condition is all messed up, and not having brackets doesn't help much either. I would write that same line of code as the following:

If you wanted it to be detected when keydown(0) then:
if (!keydown(0)) {
whatever;
}
else {
setani idle,;
}


If you wanted it to not be detected when keydown(0) then:
if (!keydown(0)) {
setani idle,;
}

And you'd want to make sure with the !keydown that you'd have a timeout or something... I'm not sure if it's the same with keydown considering the fact that I don't use keydown much.

lol yeah, i thought

"Arrays wtf only Rick makes sense"

Isnt there a quick key in here?
I forgot how it goes but it's like

NPC Code:

---

if(playerenters)

timeout=0.05;



if(timeout){

if(keypressed){

if(keydown(t),true){

bla;

}

}

timeout=0.05;

}

---

I forgot maybe it is wrong, o-well I tried.
:p
If you don't want it detecting add a key (!)
like

NPC Code:

---

if(!bla && !bla2 && !bla3 && !bla4)){

//bla

}

---

Or as kai would do:

NPC Code:

---

if(!bla){ 

if(!bla2){

 if(!bla3){

 if(!bla4){

//bla stuff

}

}

}

}

---

As it's easier to read;P

I thiiiink the original poster's enquire was about a function that would tell him whether any of the keys 0-3 was pressed, so he could unset his walking gani accordingly... so I suppose the most sensible thing to do is

NPC Code:

---

walking = false;

for (d = 0; d < 4; d ++) {

  if (keydown(d)) {

    do_walking_stuff();

    walking = true;

  }

}

tokenize idle walk;

setani #t(walking),;

---

Either way is fine, though I prefer yours.

its
keydown2(keycode(t),false)
Kai would choose the first, since the checks are related ;)


oman, Loriel's script is crazygonuts, I never thought to use tokenize like that :megaeek:

If you bothered to look at the Snippets section of Graal.net (mainly the Elaborate onwall function Loriel posted) you'd already know to do it that way ;)

I would have, if presented the challenge of scripting a walking system.

I've made 2 or 3 walking systems and hadn't even considered using tokenize, I usually get by with regular arrays. Come to think of it, I don't really remember how I handled setting the animation... ohwell, back to the point, Loriel has got some wack skills in scripting

Re-Scripting the player is a great exercise.

Difficult. But I don't think anybody expects it to be perfect.

I wish people wouldn't make such wild guesses about how I'd do something.

Your back.

Check the sig, man. I'm only here because I'm in a debate about the new supermods, over in the main forum. I only commented here because I was mentioned.

*Cough* by me
Anyways, you should come back your highly missed. Eitherway i've got nothing else to say:\

I think they think you think it should be done like that because of the KI-SGI or stuff.

For once your correct.

Ow, so many thinks. :D

KSI-GS

I'm sure you're right, but they've misinterpreted the document. I wouldn't script it in any of the ways presented thus far.

Atleast i had the right letter -_-

I wasn't dissin' you, I just wanted to make sure people knew what we were talking about.

It's interesting to see that KSI-GS found its way into the Classic tab requirements. I would never have agreed with that decision, and I doubt that the GST are enforcing it (heck, one of the members breaks almost every rule in there).

Nor did i thought that :o

hehe another scripting thread gone awry ;)

NPC Code:

---

if (created) timeout=.05;

if (timeout) {

  if (keydown(#)) {

//    move stuff

  }elseif (keydown(#)) {

//    move stuff

  }elseif (keydown(#)) {

//    move stuff

  }elseif (keydown(#)) {

//    move stuff

  }else{

//    idle stuff

  }

  timeout=.05;

}

---

Use elseifs, they're useful ;)

WRONG.

Think about it, what do you do to run diagonally? You press two arrow keys.

Eh, Rick? Your keyboard lacks diagonal arrow keys?

Your keyboard has diagnol arrow keys?

He's probably referring to the number pad, eg keys 7, 9, 1 & 3.

Laptop...

Oh sure elseifs are useful but not in this case. Unless you use if (keydown(x)&&keydown(y)){}

Or assume mutual exclusivity on the opposing arrow keys.

I might be a little late in asking this, but how exactly Loriel's tokenize convention more efficient?

it would seem to me that requesting a string to be searched through and broken down and then assigned to 2 seperate parts of an array wouldnt be as efficient at all.

if (walking == 0)
setani idle;
else
setani walk;

what is less efficient about the old way? It does one check.
even if you wanted to be crafty why not..

setstring blah,idle,walk;
setani #I(blah,walking);

although in terms of efficiency it seems equivilent to me. ::shrugs::
The tokenize idea is crazy and unique, but please explain why it is better.

Certainly is not more efficient, but I deem it more readable or compact, especially with constructions like this ;)

NPC Code:

---

  if (static == false && playerfreezetime <= 0) {

    setstring this.temp,"idle sit walk carry swim","carrystill carrysit carry carryrun","grab push pull","attack","hurt dead";

    tokenize #I(this.temp,this.mode);

    setani #t(this.submode),;

    setstring this.temp,;

  }

---