I do not want to reject change just for doing it, but
Dusty's post captures my thoughts practically verbatim. I don't mind a new coding language, especially if there will be visible benefits to the game, but I would
really like to see thorough documentation on this if other languages like Lua will not be used. It wouldn't be wise to just release it with poor instruction on how the code functions with proper syntax and examples, very much like how GS2 was released. You should be wanting to bring in more coders, not making them know GS2, then go learn other coding fundamentals from other languages (declaring variables, when to use void, etc.), then come back to Graal and implement GS2 and guess at the structure of GS3 using a different syntax knowledge from another language, then have no idea where to proceed since there is no trace of documentation anywhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stefan
For script help normally /scripthelp is working quite fine, all new functionality is automatically added to /scripthelp or to the list you get by starting Graal with the "-listscriptfunctions" command-line option.
|
Back to the not wanting to drive coders away part... That's all fine, except if a new developer wants to jump in on GS3, it's a bit of a jumbled mess with having to know GS2, then scanning and hoping that the proper syntax with examples are listed in /scripthelp. Most of the time it's just command(int, string, string) without any guidance as to what the integer and strings are supposed to be. If that's changed it will help a lot, otherwise you're going to have a lot of wiki editing to do.
My 2 cents, but I think I will stick to GS2 unless GS3 is properly documented. Though, I will say I do think heading in this direction is a good thing. The timing is just a bit off as well as the odd/clunky syntax styles. Just rip off of another language's syntax or use an already existing language fully capable of attracting new developers *cough*Lua*cough*.