addEventListener

[cbk1994]

He's saying to fix what we have, not add something totally new.

ECMAScript Standards can wait in line. We already have a way to do this, it just needs to be fixed. No need to reinvent the wheel

[Inverness]

Originally Posted by cbkbud

He's saying to fix what we have, not add something totally new.

Exactly

Originally Posted by Robin

Because you currently can't do that with catch event.

Well duh, and you can't do addeventlistener() either. Its simpler for Stefan to edit catchevent() to do what I'm saying than it is to add what you're suggesting and confuse people with having two ways of doing the same thing.

Originally Posted by cbkbud

ECMAScript Standards can wait in line. We already have a way to do this, it just needs to be fixed. No need to reinvent the wheel

I'm glad someone understands.

[Robin]

What you don't seem to understand is that addEventListener IS the wheel Stefan reinvented by making catchEvent.

Just a... slightly square... triangular wheel that doesn't work quite right.

[cbk1994]

Originally Posted by Robin

What you don't seem to understand is that addEventListener IS the wheel Stefan reinvented by making catchEvent.

Just a... slightly square... triangular wheel that doesn't work quite right.

GS2 doesn't have to comply to any of your ECMAScript Standards.

There was no catchevent in GS1, he created catchevent in GS2. Therefore, he reinvented no wheel in Graal's scripting.

[Inverness]

Originally Posted by Robin

What you don't seem to understand is that addEventListener IS the wheel Stefan reinvented by making catchEvent.

Just a... slightly square... triangular wheel that doesn't work quite right.

Look you're really starting to piss me off (relatively) with your apparent inability to think about anything beyond what you want.

You don't seem to realize that we've been using catchevent() for years and nobody wants to have to replace all instances of it with some new function just to adhere to some standard that they probably don't care about.

[Robin]

Originally Posted by Inverness

Look you're really starting to piss me off

Oh but I do love it so :P

Originally Posted by Inverness

You don't seem to realize that we've been using catchevent() for years and nobody wants to have to replace all instances of it with some new function just to adhere to some standard that they probably don't care about.

I never said anything about replacing catchevent, that would be bad for backwards compatibility.

catchevent seems to only work for GUI / HTTPRequest objects and that seems like a very small scope.

It should be modified to work with any event, custom events included.

The beauty of addEventListener is that it's an already defined function in C-like interperated scripts and you wouldn't lose backwards compatibility by adding a new function.

[Inverness]

Originally Posted by Robin

Oh but I do love it so :P

The relatively in the parentheses means that I don't get "pissed off" as much as I get irritated.

Originally Posted by Robin

catchevent seems to only work for GUI / HTTPRequest objects and that seems like a very small scope.

It was suggested multiple times that Stefan make catchevent() work with everything and not just the engine events like it does currently.

You still don't seem to understand that we do not need addeventlistener() because rather than adding a new way to do the same thing Stefan can simply modify catchevent()

On a different subject: I don't think you have the ability to be PWA if you can't understand simple things such as consistency.

[Robin]

Originally Posted by Inverness

The relatively in the parentheses means that I don't get "pissed off" as much as I get irritated.

Pissed off does not mean irritated anymore?

Originally Posted by Inverness

It was suggested multiple times that Stefan make catchevent() work with everything and not just the engine events like it does currently.

But it has not been done, perhaps to not break backwards compatibility? Perhaps he would like to wait until the next client revision?

Originally Posted by Inverness

You still don't seem to understand that we do not need addeventlistener() because rather than adding a new way to do the same thing Stefan can simply modify catchevent()

I understand, and as the name suggests, it's a very generic function. addEventListener does not even have to be added, although it would be good.

If catchevent worked the way you and myself would like it to, I could make this:

PHP Code:

function addEventListener(obj,event,func) {
  obj.catchEvent(event,func);
} 


That way, your event would work fine, and I could keep standards. As I said in my other thread, I'd like to keep general c-like based script standards in order to encourage more players to script.

Originally Posted by Inverness

On a different subject: I don't think you have the ability to be PWA if you can't understand simple things such as consistency.

Because, my wanting to be PWA has ANYTHING to do with this thread? You're just picking bones my old friend.

You say I do not understand consistency, when I am talking about standards. Standards are about keeping things consistent.

As I have also said, if you have a problem, feel free to IM me or to email me. You will not be ignored.

[cbk1994]

Originally Posted by Robin

I understand, and as the name suggests, it's a very generic function. addEventListener does not even have to be added, although it would be good.

Then stop making a fuss about it.

If catchevent worked the way you and myself would like it to, I could make this:

PHP Code:

function addEventListener(obj,event,func) {
  obj.catchEvent(event,func);
} 


Yes, that could fit perfectly into your atan->arctan junk.

I'd like to keep general c-like based script standards in order to encourage more players to script.

GS2 is easy enough to learn. Personally, I see addEventListener as more confusing. Plus, it's not like people go around and say "HMM I COULD LEARN GS2 BUT IT DOESNT COMPLY WITH MY ECMA**** "

You say I do not understand consistency, when I am talking about standards. Standards are about keeping things consistent.

We have consistency. Consistency of GS2. There is no reason we need consistency for any other languages.

Actually, I will start a crusade to make GS2 compliant with my BASICStandards

This way, everyone coming from BASIC would be able to script GS2

[Robin]

Originally Posted by cbkbud

Then stop making a fuss about it.

I already did.

Originally Posted by cbkbud

Yes, that could fit perfectly into your atan->arctan junk.

arctan is not the standard name for that function, try C, C#, Java, Actionscript etc. Judging by the fact that the following is perfectly legal GScript2, Stefan has already started to implement some Actionscript:

PHP Code:

function init(obj:Object, x:Number, y:Number) {
} 


Originally Posted by cbkbud

GS2 is easy enough to learn. Personally, I see addEventListener as more confusing. Plus, it's not like people go around and say "HMM I COULD LEARN GS2 BUT IT DOESNT COMPLY WITH MY ECMA**** "

Is it really? Then why do I continue to see some god awful scripting from otherwise talented people? If it's so easy, why don't you contribute some scripts? I haven't seen anything in the Code Gallery from you since I got here.

Plus, as I have already said, I can add my own "addEventListener" if catchevent was fixed, it does not matter to me what the function is named as long as it works

Originally Posted by cbkbud

We have consistency. Consistency of GS2. There is no reason we need consistency for any other languages.

Obviously not considering the legal bit of Actionscript / GS2 above.

Originally Posted by cbkbud

Actually, I will start a crusade to make GS2 compliant with my BASICStandards

This way, everyone coming from BASIC would be able to script GS2

BASIC has no standards, it was a Microsoft invention. ECMA is not a script on it's own. It's a set of standards, like ISO or RFC.

I was starting no crusade sir, I saw the inklings of GS2 becoming something greater than it already is and decided to try and help, and yet was bashed

[cbk1994]

Originally Posted by Robin

arctan is not the standard name for that function, try C, C#, Java, Actionscript etc.

It is silly to make another function just because you do not wish to adapt

And yes, I know atan is the standard, I also script Java and basic Actionscript.

Is it really? Then why do I continue to see some god awful scripting from otherwise talented people? If it's so easy, why don't you contribute some scripts? I haven't seen anything in the Code Gallery from you since I got here.

http://forums.graalonline.com/forums...ad.php?t=73425
http://forums.graalonline.com/forums...ad.php?t=73742
http://forums.graalonline.com/forums...ad.php?t=73784
http://forums.graalonline.com/forums...ad.php?t=73857
http://forums.graalonline.com/forums...ad.php?t=77749
http://forums.graalonline.com/forums...ad.php?t=77694
http://forums.graalonline.com/forums...ad.php?t=73726

I haven't been scripting much as final exams are approaching.

I was starting no crusade sir, I saw the inklings of GS2 becoming something greater than it already is and decided to try and help, and yet was bashed

I apologize, sir.

[Inverness]

Originally Posted by Robin

Pissed off does not mean irritated anymore?

I'm not going to define relatively for you.

Originally Posted by Robin

But it has not been done, perhaps to not break backwards compatibility? Perhaps he would like to wait until the next client revision?

Well duh, what I'm saying is in that next version he should be changing catchevent() instead of adding addeventlistener()

Originally Posted by Robin

I understand, and as the name suggests, it's a very generic function. addEventListener does not even have to be added, although it would be good.

Ok, stop pushing it then.

Originally Posted by Robin

and I could keep standards. As I said in my other thread, I'd like to keep general c-like based script standards in order to encourage more players to script.

Claiming that specific functions are a language standard is a stretch. GS2 has its own standards anyways.

Originally Posted by Robin

Because, my wanting to be PWA has ANYTHING to do with this thread? You're just picking bones my old friend.

If you want to be PWA you should understand simple concepts like what I've been saying.

Originally Posted by Robin

You say I do not understand consistency, when I am talking about standards. Standards are about keeping things consistent.

Changing GS2 all around to fit some standard nobody (few) cares about is not "keeping things consistent".

[cbk1994]

Originally Posted by Inverness

Changing GS2 all around to fit some standard nobody (few) cares about is not "keeping things consistent".

Agreed.

The key is for you to adapt, not the language.