Troman schreef: > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Troman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Troman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 10:44 PM > Subject: tmp2 >> Dennis Schridde schreef: >>> Am Donnerstag, 25. Januar 2007 18:38 schrieb Troman: >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Troman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> To: "Troman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 5:57 PM >>>> Subject: temp >>>> >>>>>> Wel the functions on their own look quite good to me. >>>>>> Their prototypes however... Let's just say that I don't like the >>>>>> idea of >>>>>> passing pointers into the scripting engine. >>>>>> >>>> Why not? That's the way most of the scripting stuff works right now. >>>> Scripts currently work with a lot of pointers passed from WZ, >>>> although from >>>> the scriptor's point of view there's no difference between >>>> integers/bools >>>> or pointers to some internal wz structures. >>>> Not that it really matters to me. If we just work with integer ids, >>>> that >>>> would mean we have less different types to define for scripts (I don't >>>> really like the idea of flooding scripts with dozens of new types, >>>> unless >>>> really needed, but i'm not yet sure what would be optimal for us). >>>> >> The fact that that's the currently employed technique hardly makes it be >> good. > Not just because of that, it simply works well, I had no issues with > pointers whatsoever. >> And indeed from the scripter there is no difference between a >> regular integer or a pointer. Which makes it all the more dangerous to >> pass pointers into scripts. This could easily result in a segfault >> beyond our control. > The way it is now you can't do anything to a pointer but only access > it, bison would simply not compile script if you tried to manipulate a > pointer, there are no operations that pointers support. You can't even > set it to NULL using scripts, that makes pointers safe. What you can > do is pass it to some internal function for it to mess it up and > that's it. So that's not an issue. Ah so if I understand it correctly the scripts can only use pointers for API calls and only change their value through them? In that case it wouldn't be as dangerous as I thought it was. >>>> BTW why don't we just use forums for such discussions? This starts >>>> to look >>>> a bit awkward to me. Maybe we can ask Kamaze to set up some >>>> protected area >>>> for the developers and those participating in the mailinglist >>>> discussion? >>>> Personally i'd also be fine with a public forum, not sure if this >>>> would >>>> work well though. >>>> >>> I think most of us are going well with a mailinglist and prefer it >>> this way. >>> At least to me it's much simpler to fire up my mail client and watch >>> several >>> threaded discussions. Forums have that flat, time-related style >>> (lost the >>> words... Allready getting late. I mean they only have one direction, >>> you >>> can't split of a discussion as easily) which makes the inconvenient >>> IMO... >>> >> Yep, I'm one of them, I really do prefer an email client above a forum. > > Well no forum then. It's just when replying you have to count those > 'greater than' signs to find out who you are actually refering to and > when you have more than 10 that looks messy not to mention that all > text is cluttered. Hmm, well, I could advise the Thunderbird thingy again. It turns those '>'-signs into nice quote blocks for viewing purposes. Although I thought MS outlook did the same.
-- Giel
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
