Robert Newson wrote: >> Not totally, I am just trying to avoid to reinvent the wheel... but I am >> afraid I'll have to... at least with a Thing solution I'll be able to >> use pipes as well to supply the sprite animator with the paths of the >> sprites... :-) And best of all it would be reusable... :-) > > >I've missed summat in my years in the wilderness (away from contact with ppl >with QLs)...what exactly are "Things"?
Virtually anything you want them to be, hence the name. Probably best described as a System Resource. The operating system maintains a linked list of such resources, called The Thing List. Probably the best definition of a Thing is an area of memory with a name or identifier; that way it can be filled with data or code to do whatever the programmer wants it to do. It can then become an OS extension, a BASIC extension, a data storage area...the list is almost endless. Knowing the identifier (to be able to find it in the list) and the purpose and manner of its use, anything can use it as long as it understands it. Which is the downfall of Things - the very vagueness of what it can be means a lot of programmers don't have the knowledge or documentation to implement "things". Of course the Thing System must be present for Things to be implemented. Gnerally, this means that PE must be there. There is also a THING_REXT file around to provide the necessary code to implement them, and a file called THING05_zip floating around in the PD scene with some admittedly old documentation. -- Dilwyn Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.soft.net.uk/dj/index.html
