From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7515 invoked by alias); 20 Nov 2003 02:26:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact xconq7-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: xconq7-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 7506 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2003 02:26:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outbound28-2.lax.untd.com) (64.136.28.160) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Nov 2003 02:26:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 21014 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2003 02:26:44 -0000 Received: from 66-52-198-231.sttl.dial.netzero.com (HELO vangogh) (66.52.198.231) by smtpout01.lax.untd.com with SMTP; 20 Nov 2003 02:26:44 -0000 From: "Brandon J. Van Every" To: "xconq" Subject: RE: Xconq language thoughts Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 02:47:00 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal In-Reply-To: <3FBC23C2.80204@apple.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal X-SW-Source: 2003/txt/msg00821.txt.bz2 Stan Shebs > > For instance, there has long been an ability to write > AIs customized > for a particular game design, but so far everybody has > preferred to just > sponge off the generic AI instead. (Not too surprising, since > AI writing > is hard, and there is no possible API that can help you with the hard > parts.) Yes, writing AIs is hard. However, most AI developers probably have no desire to write AIs in GDL, they probably want to use their language of choice. And, as far as difficulty of plugging AIs into an architecture goes, the Xconq C codebase looks (ahem) less than ideal. It is a sprawl. It may be a well-organized sprawl but it is still hundreds and hundreds of C functions. AI developers - indeed, any kind of developers - are probably more willing to do things in OO source code pools that take far less work. > So when thinking about language integration, don't think about resumes > or user familiarity or whatever; think about how much Xconq > machinery you want to use as-is, vs how much you want to change. Once I get done eyeballing the Xconq code, I hope there's something I want to use. I've already decided on GUI stuff: I don't want to use any of it. So, I am thinking in terms of whether people want to make the Xconq codebase more OO and more usable to newcomers? Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA Taking risk where others will not.