Le Thursday 10 May 2007 08:34:07 Mark Wedel, vous avez écrit :
Lalo Martins wrote:
One thing that has been bothering me recently, is that increasingly, most
scripts are tied to arches, yet they reside inside maps, which means an
admin needs to keep arches and maps strictly in sync.
I don't
Le Thursday 10 May 2007 13:41:08 Lalo Martins, vous avez écrit :
mmm... I don't understand what the advantage of this would be - I think
it makes things rather complex for map-makers, with no obvious benefit.
You missed the point here. It couldn't possibly make things complex for
Alex Schultz wrote:
Such running scripts from text in memory is very possible indeed :)
In fact, we could (and should IMHO) go one step further: Run it from the
bytecodes in memory. The python code already has faculties for caching
the bytecode of python scripts in memory (caches up to 16
Hello.
One thing that has been bothering me recently, is that increasingly, most
scripts are tied to arches, yet they reside inside maps, which means an
admin needs to keep arches and maps strictly in sync.
I'd like to propose the tiniest addition to the complexity of the python
plugin, so
On Sun, 06 May 2007 18:13:32 +0200, Nicolas Weeger wrote:
I agree there need to be a way to separate scripts for archetypes,
instead of having'em in the maps directory.
I would put them in a subdirectory under where archetypes / treasures /
formulae are, so we keep some coherence.
Right...
One thing that has been bothering me recently, is that increasingly, most
scripts are tied to arches, yet they reside inside maps, which means an
admin needs to keep arches and maps strictly in sync.
I'd like to propose the tiniest addition to the complexity of the python
plugin, so that we'd
6 matches
Mail list logo
