Re: [Opensim-users] Proposal for a new OSSL function
Alright, I will look into some other ways to accomplish what I'm trying to do using the suggestions both of you have provided. I will go ahead and remove the proposal from the wiki since it's not a very good idea to implement. Thank you very much for the consideration though! :) On 3/16/2015 1:33 PM, Melanie wrote: There are tools in SL that are able to gather this information, through a combination of llGetObjectDetails and llSensor and some others. This includes the rotation and scaling as well as the kind of object, etc. Builder's tools do this regularly to place red dot prim spheres at the corners of the blocks to be worked on. I was very surprised to see this working in SL a few years ago, but after a bit of thought, it was quite clear how they do it even in the limited environment of LSL in SL. Scanning for prims by name is worse than useless, imagine the load it would cause to search for Primitive or Object, respectively. Scanning for prims by position is a loop over all objects in the sim, each time, because OpenSim doesn't use octrees fir spatal organization, as Dahlia already stated. I don't see where that function is in the interest of OpenSim and it's users. I suggest that you may be able to write a private region module to this effect, giving you this function but not tasking core with maintaining it for you. - Melanie On 16/03/2015 19:23, Dahlia Trimble wrote: It *always* would need to scan the entire region contents because OpenSimulator lacks the ability to do spatial queries in any way other than a linear search. Sorry but I don't see the benefit of having the sim developers need to maintain extra complexity so your script can have a few less lines of code. On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 5:34 AM, Chris mewtwo0...@gmail.com wrote: My idea was to make it easier to get this information (from an LSL standpoint) directly where it's called. So you could have something like this: list objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair], OBJECT_NAME | OBJECT_POS); string objName = llList2String(objDetails, 0); vector objPos = llList2Vector(objDetails, 1); or perhaps iterate through the list if more than one set of data is returned. Code complexity (Understood that it would not be reduced server side) is reduced on the script side of things. I do agree that scanning an entire region by default would put a lot of load on the simulator which is why I also provided the option of limiting the scan distance. Perhaps it would be better to remove the list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, list params) and just have list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, float range, list params) so it would force the user of the function to think about the distance needed to acquire this information; maybe even make a max distance for this function configurable in OpenSim.ini so that it can't scan further than that from that configured point of origin? Potential for abuse is always a concern; I would think this function would fit in a Threat level of possibly at least High but probably at least VeryHigh. Then there's always the Allow_* configuration to disable this completely if an operator doesn't want this used at all or to only allow it for certain users. I do understand that event usage is commonplace but we still have os* functions such as the notecard functions that skip their related events entirely, which in my opinion, is very useful as it makes it very easy to gather and manipulate data on the spot in a relatively short amount of scripting. In the case of osGetNotecardLine() for instance it's very simple to read a line in a notecard in just one line of code. With llGetNotecardLine() a dataserver event would need to be set up as well as its respective scripting in that event to handle the data, increment the line count, etc. osGetNotecardLine() in combination with osGetNumberOfNotecardLines() with a loop of some kind results in initially a much shorter much easier to implement notecard reader. While I understand completely about the concerns of simulator load on a region scan; I'm not quite understanding (if hypothetically this function was implemented) the concern of having an event-less data return? On 3/13/2015 3:25 PM, R.Gunther wrote: I expected the OSSL works also with UUID you get from sensor. llGetObject details works very good for me, except am misisng the object size. I have a workaround for that. But a command that need to scan the whole sim to get something. I agree with dahlia, bad idea. On 2015-03-13 21:12, Dahlia Trimble wrote: Some initial thoughts Why not a function that returns a uuid for a name? Actually this could be done with a sensor now. No need to duplicate llGetObjectDetails functionality, just call it once you get the uuid. Such a function would need to scan every object in the region for a name match, similar to how a sensor would do it. This can put a lot of load on the simulator and could tie up internal data structures until the scan completes, possibly
Re: [Opensim-users] Proposal for a new OSSL function
My idea was to make it easier to get this information (from an LSL standpoint) directly where it's called. So you could have something like this: list objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair], OBJECT_NAME | OBJECT_POS); string objName = llList2String(objDetails, 0); vector objPos = llList2Vector(objDetails, 1); or perhaps iterate through the list if more than one set of data is returned. Code complexity (Understood that it would not be reduced server side) is reduced on the script side of things. I do agree that scanning an entire region by default would put a lot of load on the simulator which is why I also provided the option of limiting the scan distance. Perhaps it would be better to remove the list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, list params) and just have list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, float range, list params) so it would force the user of the function to think about the distance needed to acquire this information; maybe even make a max distance for this function configurable in OpenSim.ini so that it can't scan further than that from that configured point of origin? Potential for abuse is always a concern; I would think this function would fit in a Threat level of possibly at least High but probably at least VeryHigh. Then there's always the Allow_* configuration to disable this completely if an operator doesn't want this used at all or to only allow it for certain users. I do understand that event usage is commonplace but we still have os* functions such as the notecard functions that skip their related events entirely, which in my opinion, is very useful as it makes it very easy to gather and manipulate data on the spot in a relatively short amount of scripting. In the case of osGetNotecardLine() for instance it's very simple to read a line in a notecard in just one line of code. With llGetNotecardLine() a dataserver event would need to be set up as well as its respective scripting in that event to handle the data, increment the line count, etc. osGetNotecardLine() in combination with osGetNumberOfNotecardLines() with a loop of some kind results in initially a much shorter much easier to implement notecard reader. While I understand completely about the concerns of simulator load on a region scan; I'm not quite understanding (if hypothetically this function was implemented) the concern of having an event-less data return? On 3/13/2015 3:25 PM, R.Gunther wrote: I expected the OSSL works also with UUID you get from sensor. llGetObject details works very good for me, except am misisng the object size. I have a workaround for that. But a command that need to scan the whole sim to get something. I agree with dahlia, bad idea. On 2015-03-13 21:12, Dahlia Trimble wrote: Some initial thoughts Why not a function that returns a uuid for a name? Actually this could be done with a sensor now. No need to duplicate llGetObjectDetails functionality, just call it once you get the uuid. Such a function would need to scan every object in the region for a name match, similar to how a sensor would do it. This can put a lot of load on the simulator and could tie up internal data structures until the scan completes, possibly preventing other more critical code from executing. If such functionality was added, it would likely need to be throttled to prevent abuse and/or use events to return results similar to sensors now. Perhaps another approach might be to get rid of the sensor distance limit, or relax it in favor of some other penalty such as a script delay if a further distance is requested. This would, however, deviate from the SL API documented behavior and as such would probably need to go into a os* function. Sorry, I don't accept the argument that it reduces code complexity, it only moves the complexity into the simulator code. Script event patterns are quite common and well understood by the community and have the advantage that, when used properly in place of other patterns (loops, etc), help the simulator run better. On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Chris mewtwo0...@gmail.com mailto:mewtwo0...@gmail.com wrote: Getting an object's size would be a really nice addition; but going by how llGetScale() functions I believe it would be limited to getting just the root prim's size rather than overall size if I'm thinking about this correctly. On 3/13/2015 2:03 PM, R.Gunther wrote: One thing that llGetObject detail is missing is to get the prim size. so if this command get add. i hope the add the object size too. On 2015-03-13 20:00, Chris wrote: Hello all, I have a proposal for a new OSSL function that could possibly prove useful: osGetObjectNameDetails() I would have sent this to the opensim-dev mailing list but I'm unsure now of where this is located and how to sign up for that list since the
Re: [Opensim-users] Proposal for a new OSSL function
It *always* would need to scan the entire region contents because OpenSimulator lacks the ability to do spatial queries in any way other than a linear search. Sorry but I don't see the benefit of having the sim developers need to maintain extra complexity so your script can have a few less lines of code. On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 5:34 AM, Chris mewtwo0...@gmail.com wrote: My idea was to make it easier to get this information (from an LSL standpoint) directly where it's called. So you could have something like this: list objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair], OBJECT_NAME | OBJECT_POS); string objName = llList2String(objDetails, 0); vector objPos = llList2Vector(objDetails, 1); or perhaps iterate through the list if more than one set of data is returned. Code complexity (Understood that it would not be reduced server side) is reduced on the script side of things. I do agree that scanning an entire region by default would put a lot of load on the simulator which is why I also provided the option of limiting the scan distance. Perhaps it would be better to remove the list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, list params) and just have list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, float range, list params) so it would force the user of the function to think about the distance needed to acquire this information; maybe even make a max distance for this function configurable in OpenSim.ini so that it can't scan further than that from that configured point of origin? Potential for abuse is always a concern; I would think this function would fit in a Threat level of possibly at least High but probably at least VeryHigh. Then there's always the Allow_* configuration to disable this completely if an operator doesn't want this used at all or to only allow it for certain users. I do understand that event usage is commonplace but we still have os* functions such as the notecard functions that skip their related events entirely, which in my opinion, is very useful as it makes it very easy to gather and manipulate data on the spot in a relatively short amount of scripting. In the case of osGetNotecardLine() for instance it's very simple to read a line in a notecard in just one line of code. With llGetNotecardLine() a dataserver event would need to be set up as well as its respective scripting in that event to handle the data, increment the line count, etc. osGetNotecardLine() in combination with osGetNumberOfNotecardLines() with a loop of some kind results in initially a much shorter much easier to implement notecard reader. While I understand completely about the concerns of simulator load on a region scan; I'm not quite understanding (if hypothetically this function was implemented) the concern of having an event-less data return? On 3/13/2015 3:25 PM, R.Gunther wrote: I expected the OSSL works also with UUID you get from sensor. llGetObject details works very good for me, except am misisng the object size. I have a workaround for that. But a command that need to scan the whole sim to get something. I agree with dahlia, bad idea. On 2015-03-13 21:12, Dahlia Trimble wrote: Some initial thoughts Why not a function that returns a uuid for a name? Actually this could be done with a sensor now. No need to duplicate llGetObjectDetails functionality, just call it once you get the uuid. Such a function would need to scan every object in the region for a name match, similar to how a sensor would do it. This can put a lot of load on the simulator and could tie up internal data structures until the scan completes, possibly preventing other more critical code from executing. If such functionality was added, it would likely need to be throttled to prevent abuse and/or use events to return results similar to sensors now. Perhaps another approach might be to get rid of the sensor distance limit, or relax it in favor of some other penalty such as a script delay if a further distance is requested. This would, however, deviate from the SL API documented behavior and as such would probably need to go into a os* function. Sorry, I don't accept the argument that it reduces code complexity, it only moves the complexity into the simulator code. Script event patterns are quite common and well understood by the community and have the advantage that, when used properly in place of other patterns (loops, etc), help the simulator run better. On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Chris mewtwo0...@gmail.com wrote: Getting an object's size would be a really nice addition; but going by how llGetScale() functions I believe it would be limited to getting just the root prim's size rather than overall size if I'm thinking about this correctly. On 3/13/2015 2:03 PM, R.Gunther wrote: One thing that llGetObject detail is missing is to get the prim size. so if this command get add. i hope the add the object size too. On 2015-03-13 20:00, Chris wrote: Hello all,
Re: [Opensim-users] Proposal for a new OSSL function
There are tools in SL that are able to gather this information, through a combination of llGetObjectDetails and llSensor and some others. This includes the rotation and scaling as well as the kind of object, etc. Builder's tools do this regularly to place red dot prim spheres at the corners of the blocks to be worked on. I was very surprised to see this working in SL a few years ago, but after a bit of thought, it was quite clear how they do it even in the limited environment of LSL in SL. Scanning for prims by name is worse than useless, imagine the load it would cause to search for Primitive or Object, respectively. Scanning for prims by position is a loop over all objects in the sim, each time, because OpenSim doesn't use octrees fir spatal organization, as Dahlia already stated. I don't see where that function is in the interest of OpenSim and it's users. I suggest that you may be able to write a private region module to this effect, giving you this function but not tasking core with maintaining it for you. - Melanie On 16/03/2015 19:23, Dahlia Trimble wrote: It *always* would need to scan the entire region contents because OpenSimulator lacks the ability to do spatial queries in any way other than a linear search. Sorry but I don't see the benefit of having the sim developers need to maintain extra complexity so your script can have a few less lines of code. On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 5:34 AM, Chris mewtwo0...@gmail.com wrote: My idea was to make it easier to get this information (from an LSL standpoint) directly where it's called. So you could have something like this: list objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair], OBJECT_NAME | OBJECT_POS); string objName = llList2String(objDetails, 0); vector objPos = llList2Vector(objDetails, 1); or perhaps iterate through the list if more than one set of data is returned. Code complexity (Understood that it would not be reduced server side) is reduced on the script side of things. I do agree that scanning an entire region by default would put a lot of load on the simulator which is why I also provided the option of limiting the scan distance. Perhaps it would be better to remove the list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, list params) and just have list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, float range, list params) so it would force the user of the function to think about the distance needed to acquire this information; maybe even make a max distance for this function configurable in OpenSim.ini so that it can't scan further than that from that configured point of origin? Potential for abuse is always a concern; I would think this function would fit in a Threat level of possibly at least High but probably at least VeryHigh. Then there's always the Allow_* configuration to disable this completely if an operator doesn't want this used at all or to only allow it for certain users. I do understand that event usage is commonplace but we still have os* functions such as the notecard functions that skip their related events entirely, which in my opinion, is very useful as it makes it very easy to gather and manipulate data on the spot in a relatively short amount of scripting. In the case of osGetNotecardLine() for instance it's very simple to read a line in a notecard in just one line of code. With llGetNotecardLine() a dataserver event would need to be set up as well as its respective scripting in that event to handle the data, increment the line count, etc. osGetNotecardLine() in combination with osGetNumberOfNotecardLines() with a loop of some kind results in initially a much shorter much easier to implement notecard reader. While I understand completely about the concerns of simulator load on a region scan; I'm not quite understanding (if hypothetically this function was implemented) the concern of having an event-less data return? On 3/13/2015 3:25 PM, R.Gunther wrote: I expected the OSSL works also with UUID you get from sensor. llGetObject details works very good for me, except am misisng the object size. I have a workaround for that. But a command that need to scan the whole sim to get something. I agree with dahlia, bad idea. On 2015-03-13 21:12, Dahlia Trimble wrote: Some initial thoughts Why not a function that returns a uuid for a name? Actually this could be done with a sensor now. No need to duplicate llGetObjectDetails functionality, just call it once you get the uuid. Such a function would need to scan every object in the region for a name match, similar to how a sensor would do it. This can put a lot of load on the simulator and could tie up internal data structures until the scan completes, possibly preventing other more critical code from executing. If such functionality was added, it would likely need to be throttled to prevent abuse and/or use events to return results similar to sensors now. Perhaps another approach might be to get rid of the sensor distance
Re: [Opensim-users] Proposal for a new OSSL function
One thing that llGetObject detail is missing is to get the prim size. so
if this command get add. i hope the add the object size too.
On 2015-03-13 20:00, Chris wrote:
Hello all,
I have a proposal for a new OSSL function that could possibly prove
useful: osGetObjectNameDetails()
I would have sent this to the opensim-dev mailing list but I'm unsure
now of where this is located and how to sign up for that list since
the old mailing list locations are now gone. Can someone please point
me in the right direction? :)
This proposal has also been posted at
http://opensimulator.org/wiki/OSSL_Proposals
Thank you in advance for the consideration!
--
Function:
--
list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, list params);
list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, float range, list params);
-
Description:
-
Would work similarly to llGetObjectDetails() but has the advantage of
specifying for an object's name (or list of names) instead of by key.
If more than one name match is found then the return list will have
those matches (or groups of matches if more than one parameter is
supplied) sorted in order from nearest to furthest from the prim
calling osGetObjectNameDetails. By default this would scan the entire
region but optionally a range can be specified to only search within a
certain radius similar to llSensor().
This has potential, for most single item situations at least,
eliminate the need for an llSensor() call and also eliminate the need
for a sensor event thus reducing code complexity and make for very
easy and very quick data collection to be further processed upon.
-
Example:
-
list objDetails;
default
{
state_entry()
{
//Example 1:
//For this example assume this prim is located at 128, 125,
30 and we have two objects named 'Chair'.
//'Chair' #1 is located at 128, 128, 30 and owned by avatar
UUID 5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a
//'Chair' #2 is located at 128, 130, 30 and owned by avatar
UUID 1c612fb2-748c-4a1a-ad57-27f488210c06
objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair], OBJECT_NAME |
OBJECT_POS | OBJECT_OWNER);
llOwnerSay(llDumpList2String(objDetails, , ));
//llOwnerSay() output should be: Chair, 128, 128, 30,
5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a, Chair, 128, 130, 30,
1c612fb2-748c-4a1a-ad57-27f488210c06
//--
//Example 2:
//For this example assume everything stays the same as in
Example 1 except that we're specifying a range.
objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair], 5.0,
OBJECT_NAME | OBJECT_POS | OBJECT_OWNER);
llOwnerSay(llDumpList2String(objDetails, , ));
//llOwnerSay() output should be: Chair, 128, 128, 30,
5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a
//--
//Example 3:
//For this example assume this prim is located at 128, 125,
30 and we have two objects: 'Chair 1' and 'Chair 2'.
//'Chair 1' is located at 128, 128, 30 and owned by avatar
UUID 5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a
//'Chair 2' is located at 128, 130, 30 and owned by avatar
UUID 1c612fb2-748c-4a1a-ad57-27f488210c06
objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair 1, Chair 2],
OBJECT_NAME | OBJECT_POS | OBJECT_OWNER);
llOwnerSay(llDumpList2String(objDetails, , ));
//llOwnerSay() output should be: Chair 1, 128, 128, 30,
5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a, Chair 2, 128, 130, 30,
1c612fb2-748c-4a1a-ad57-27f488210c06
//--
//Example 4:
//For this example assume everything stays the same as in
Example 3 except that we're specifying a range.
objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair 1, Chair 2],
5.0, OBJECT_NAME | OBJECT_POS | OBJECT_OWNER);
llOwnerSay(llDumpList2String(objDetails, , ));
//llOwnerSay() output should be: Chair 1, 128, 128, 30,
5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a
}
}
___
Opensim-users mailing list
Opensim-users@opensimulator.org
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
Re: [Opensim-users] Proposal for a new OSSL function
Getting an object's size would be a really nice addition; but going by
how llGetScale() functions I believe it would be limited to getting just
the root prim's size rather than overall size if I'm thinking about this
correctly.
On 3/13/2015 2:03 PM, R.Gunther wrote:
One thing that llGetObject detail is missing is to get the prim size.
so if this command get add. i hope the add the object size too.
On 2015-03-13 20:00, Chris wrote:
Hello all,
I have a proposal for a new OSSL function that could possibly prove
useful: osGetObjectNameDetails()
I would have sent this to the opensim-dev mailing list but I'm unsure
now of where this is located and how to sign up for that list since
the old mailing list locations are now gone. Can someone please point
me in the right direction? :)
This proposal has also been posted at
http://opensimulator.org/wiki/OSSL_Proposals
Thank you in advance for the consideration!
--
Function:
--
list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, list params);
list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, float range, list params);
-
Description:
-
Would work similarly to llGetObjectDetails() but has the advantage of
specifying for an object's name (or list of names) instead of by key.
If more than one name match is found then the return list will have
those matches (or groups of matches if more than one parameter is
supplied) sorted in order from nearest to furthest from the prim
calling osGetObjectNameDetails. By default this would scan the entire
region but optionally a range can be specified to only search within
a certain radius similar to llSensor().
This has potential, for most single item situations at least,
eliminate the need for an llSensor() call and also eliminate the need
for a sensor event thus reducing code complexity and make for very
easy and very quick data collection to be further processed upon.
-
Example:
-
list objDetails;
default
{
state_entry()
{
//Example 1:
//For this example assume this prim is located at 128, 125,
30 and we have two objects named 'Chair'.
//'Chair' #1 is located at 128, 128, 30 and owned by avatar
UUID 5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a
//'Chair' #2 is located at 128, 130, 30 and owned by avatar
UUID 1c612fb2-748c-4a1a-ad57-27f488210c06
objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair], OBJECT_NAME |
OBJECT_POS | OBJECT_OWNER);
llOwnerSay(llDumpList2String(objDetails, , ));
//llOwnerSay() output should be: Chair, 128, 128, 30,
5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a, Chair, 128, 130, 30,
1c612fb2-748c-4a1a-ad57-27f488210c06
//--
//Example 2:
//For this example assume everything stays the same as in
Example 1 except that we're specifying a range.
objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair], 5.0,
OBJECT_NAME | OBJECT_POS | OBJECT_OWNER);
llOwnerSay(llDumpList2String(objDetails, , ));
//llOwnerSay() output should be: Chair, 128, 128, 30,
5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a
//--
//Example 3:
//For this example assume this prim is located at 128, 125,
30 and we have two objects: 'Chair 1' and 'Chair 2'.
//'Chair 1' is located at 128, 128, 30 and owned by avatar
UUID 5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a
//'Chair 2' is located at 128, 130, 30 and owned by avatar
UUID 1c612fb2-748c-4a1a-ad57-27f488210c06
objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair 1, Chair 2],
OBJECT_NAME | OBJECT_POS | OBJECT_OWNER);
llOwnerSay(llDumpList2String(objDetails, , ));
//llOwnerSay() output should be: Chair 1, 128, 128, 30,
5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a, Chair 2, 128, 130, 30,
1c612fb2-748c-4a1a-ad57-27f488210c06
//--
//Example 4:
//For this example assume everything stays the same as in
Example 3 except that we're specifying a range.
objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair 1, Chair 2],
5.0, OBJECT_NAME | OBJECT_POS | OBJECT_OWNER);
llOwnerSay(llDumpList2String(objDetails, , ));
//llOwnerSay() output should be: Chair 1, 128, 128, 30,
5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a
}
}
___
Opensim-users mailing list
Opensim-users@opensimulator.org
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
--
OpenSim: 10 Region Standalone on 0.7.6 Dev
Physics: Open Dynamics Engine
OS: Windows 7 (x64)
CPU: AMD FX 8320
[Opensim-users] Proposal for a new OSSL function
Hello all,
I have a proposal for a new OSSL function that could possibly prove
useful: osGetObjectNameDetails()
I would have sent this to the opensim-dev mailing list but I'm unsure
now of where this is located and how to sign up for that list since the
old mailing list locations are now gone. Can someone please point me in
the right direction? :)
This proposal has also been posted at
http://opensimulator.org/wiki/OSSL_Proposals
Thank you in advance for the consideration!
--
Function:
--
list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, list params);
list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, float range, list params);
-
Description:
-
Would work similarly to llGetObjectDetails() but has the advantage of
specifying for an object's name (or list of names) instead of by key. If
more than one name match is found then the return list will have those
matches (or groups of matches if more than one parameter is supplied)
sorted in order from nearest to furthest from the prim calling
osGetObjectNameDetails. By default this would scan the entire region but
optionally a range can be specified to only search within a certain
radius similar to llSensor().
This has potential, for most single item situations at least, eliminate
the need for an llSensor() call and also eliminate the need for a sensor
event thus reducing code complexity and make for very easy and very
quick data collection to be further processed upon.
-
Example:
-
list objDetails;
default
{
state_entry()
{
//Example 1:
//For this example assume this prim is located at 128, 125,
30 and we have two objects named 'Chair'.
//'Chair' #1 is located at 128, 128, 30 and owned by avatar
UUID 5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a
//'Chair' #2 is located at 128, 130, 30 and owned by avatar
UUID 1c612fb2-748c-4a1a-ad57-27f488210c06
objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair], OBJECT_NAME |
OBJECT_POS | OBJECT_OWNER);
llOwnerSay(llDumpList2String(objDetails, , ));
//llOwnerSay() output should be: Chair, 128, 128, 30,
5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a, Chair, 128, 130, 30,
1c612fb2-748c-4a1a-ad57-27f488210c06
//--
//Example 2:
//For this example assume everything stays the same as in
Example 1 except that we're specifying a range.
objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair], 5.0, OBJECT_NAME
| OBJECT_POS | OBJECT_OWNER);
llOwnerSay(llDumpList2String(objDetails, , ));
//llOwnerSay() output should be: Chair, 128, 128, 30,
5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a
//--
//Example 3:
//For this example assume this prim is located at 128, 125,
30 and we have two objects: 'Chair 1' and 'Chair 2'.
//'Chair 1' is located at 128, 128, 30 and owned by avatar
UUID 5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a
//'Chair 2' is located at 128, 130, 30 and owned by avatar
UUID 1c612fb2-748c-4a1a-ad57-27f488210c06
objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair 1, Chair 2],
OBJECT_NAME | OBJECT_POS | OBJECT_OWNER);
llOwnerSay(llDumpList2String(objDetails, , ));
//llOwnerSay() output should be: Chair 1, 128, 128, 30,
5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a, Chair 2, 128, 130, 30,
1c612fb2-748c-4a1a-ad57-27f488210c06
//--
//Example 4:
//For this example assume everything stays the same as in
Example 3 except that we're specifying a range.
objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair 1, Chair 2],
5.0, OBJECT_NAME | OBJECT_POS | OBJECT_OWNER);
llOwnerSay(llDumpList2String(objDetails, , ));
//llOwnerSay() output should be: Chair 1, 128, 128, 30,
5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a
}
}
--
OpenSim: 10 Region Standalone on 0.8.1 Dev
Physics: Open Dynamics Engine
OS: Windows 7 (x64)
CPU: AMD FX 8320 8-Core 3.5 GHz
Memory: 16 GB DDR3
Database: MySQL 5.1.63 (x64)
___
Opensim-users mailing list
Opensim-users@opensimulator.org
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
Re: [Opensim-users] Proposal for a new OSSL function
Some initial thoughts
Why not a function that returns a uuid for a name? Actually this could be
done with a sensor now. No need to duplicate llGetObjectDetails
functionality, just call it once you get the uuid.
Such a function would need to scan every object in the region for a name
match, similar to how a sensor would do it. This can put a lot of load on
the simulator and could tie up internal data structures until the scan
completes, possibly preventing other more critical code from executing. If
such functionality was added, it would likely need to be throttled to
prevent abuse and/or use events to return results similar to sensors now.
Perhaps another approach might be to get rid of the sensor distance limit,
or relax it in favor of some other penalty such as a script delay if a
further distance is requested. This would, however, deviate from the SL API
documented behavior and as such would probably need to go into a os*
function.
Sorry, I don't accept the argument that it reduces code complexity, it only
moves the complexity into the simulator code. Script event patterns are
quite common and well understood by the community and have the advantage
that, when used properly in place of other patterns (loops, etc), help the
simulator run better.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Chris mewtwo0...@gmail.com wrote:
Getting an object's size would be a really nice addition; but going by how
llGetScale() functions I believe it would be limited to getting just the
root prim's size rather than overall size if I'm thinking about this
correctly.
On 3/13/2015 2:03 PM, R.Gunther wrote:
One thing that llGetObject detail is missing is to get the prim size. so
if this command get add. i hope the add the object size too.
On 2015-03-13 20:00, Chris wrote:
Hello all,
I have a proposal for a new OSSL function that could possibly prove
useful: osGetObjectNameDetails()
I would have sent this to the opensim-dev mailing list but I'm unsure
now of where this is located and how to sign up for that list since the old
mailing list locations are now gone. Can someone please point me in the
right direction? :)
This proposal has also been posted at http://opensimulator.org/wiki/
OSSL_Proposals
Thank you in advance for the consideration!
--
Function:
--
list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, list params);
list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, float range, list params);
-
Description:
-
Would work similarly to llGetObjectDetails() but has the advantage of
specifying for an object's name (or list of names) instead of by key. If
more than one name match is found then the return list will have those
matches (or groups of matches if more than one parameter is supplied)
sorted in order from nearest to furthest from the prim calling
osGetObjectNameDetails. By default this would scan the entire region but
optionally a range can be specified to only search within a certain radius
similar to llSensor().
This has potential, for most single item situations at least, eliminate
the need for an llSensor() call and also eliminate the need for a sensor
event thus reducing code complexity and make for very easy and very quick
data collection to be further processed upon.
-
Example:
-
list objDetails;
default
{
state_entry()
{
//Example 1:
//For this example assume this prim is located at 128, 125, 30
and we have two objects named 'Chair'.
//'Chair' #1 is located at 128, 128, 30 and owned by avatar
UUID 5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a
//'Chair' #2 is located at 128, 130, 30 and owned by avatar
UUID 1c612fb2-748c-4a1a-ad57-27f488210c06
objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair], OBJECT_NAME |
OBJECT_POS | OBJECT_OWNER);
llOwnerSay(llDumpList2String(objDetails, , ));
//llOwnerSay() output should be: Chair, 128, 128, 30,
5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a, Chair, 128, 130, 30,
1c612fb2-748c-4a1a-ad57-27f488210c06
//--
//Example 2:
//For this example assume everything stays the same as in
Example 1 except that we're specifying a range.
objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair], 5.0, OBJECT_NAME
| OBJECT_POS | OBJECT_OWNER);
llOwnerSay(llDumpList2String(objDetails, , ));
//llOwnerSay() output should be: Chair, 128, 128, 30,
5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a
//--
//Example 3:
//For this example assume this prim is located at 128, 125, 30
and we have two objects: 'Chair 1' and 'Chair 2'.
//'Chair 1' is located at 128, 128, 30 and owned by
Re: [Opensim-users] Proposal for a new OSSL function
I expected the OSSL works also with UUID you get from sensor.
llGetObject details works very good for me, except am misisng the object
size.
I have a workaround for that. But a command that need to scan the whole
sim to get something. I agree with dahlia, bad idea.
On 2015-03-13 21:12, Dahlia Trimble wrote:
Some initial thoughts
Why not a function that returns a uuid for a name? Actually this could
be done with a sensor now. No need to duplicate llGetObjectDetails
functionality, just call it once you get the uuid.
Such a function would need to scan every object in the region for a
name match, similar to how a sensor would do it. This can put a lot of
load on the simulator and could tie up internal data structures until
the scan completes, possibly preventing other more critical code from
executing. If such functionality was added, it would likely need to be
throttled to prevent abuse and/or use events to return results similar
to sensors now. Perhaps another approach might be to get rid of the
sensor distance limit, or relax it in favor of some other penalty such
as a script delay if a further distance is requested. This would,
however, deviate from the SL API documented behavior and as such would
probably need to go into a os* function.
Sorry, I don't accept the argument that it reduces code complexity, it
only moves the complexity into the simulator code. Script event
patterns are quite common and well understood by the community and
have the advantage that, when used properly in place of other patterns
(loops, etc), help the simulator run better.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Chris mewtwo0...@gmail.com
mailto:mewtwo0...@gmail.com wrote:
Getting an object's size would be a really nice addition; but
going by how llGetScale() functions I believe it would be limited
to getting just the root prim's size rather than overall size if
I'm thinking about this correctly.
On 3/13/2015 2:03 PM, R.Gunther wrote:
One thing that llGetObject detail is missing is to get the
prim size. so if this command get add. i hope the add the
object size too.
On 2015-03-13 20:00, Chris wrote:
Hello all,
I have a proposal for a new OSSL function that could
possibly prove useful: osGetObjectNameDetails()
I would have sent this to the opensim-dev mailing list but
I'm unsure now of where this is located and how to sign up
for that list since the old mailing list locations are now
gone. Can someone please point me in the right direction? :)
This proposal has also been posted at
http://opensimulator.org/wiki/OSSL_Proposals
Thank you in advance for the consideration!
--
Function:
--
list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, list params);
list osGetObjectNameDetails(list names, float range, list
params);
-
Description:
-
Would work similarly to llGetObjectDetails() but has the
advantage of specifying for an object's name (or list of
names) instead of by key. If more than one name match is
found then the return list will have those matches (or
groups of matches if more than one parameter is supplied)
sorted in order from nearest to furthest from the prim
calling osGetObjectNameDetails. By default this would scan
the entire region but optionally a range can be specified
to only search within a certain radius similar to llSensor().
This has potential, for most single item situations at
least, eliminate the need for an llSensor() call and also
eliminate the need for a sensor event thus reducing code
complexity and make for very easy and very quick data
collection to be further processed upon.
-
Example:
-
list objDetails;
default
{
state_entry()
{
//Example 1:
//For this example assume this prim is located at
128, 125, 30 and we have two objects named 'Chair'.
//'Chair' #1 is located at 128, 128, 30 and
owned by avatar UUID 5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a
//'Chair' #2 is located at 128, 130, 30 and
owned by avatar UUID 1c612fb2-748c-4a1a-ad57-27f488210c06
objDetails = osGetObjectNameDetails([Chair],
OBJECT_NAME | OBJECT_POS | OBJECT_OWNER);
llOwnerSay(llDumpList2String(objDetails, , ));
//llOwnerSay() output should be: Chair, 128, 128,
30, 5f9c7c6c-f2c9-4196-8d8d-07cdeb71821a, Chair, 128,
