Comments | ichijo_akari: Feature Creep

ichijo_akari

Feature Creep

Mar 26, 2007 12:13

One of the issues I tend to clash with a lot of programmers on is the issue of tossing in options/toggles/etc on programs I work on, be they scripts, MUF, engines, servers, etc. When I maintained code on MUCKs in the past, and someone came to me with a problem they had with how a program worked for them, or how it didn't work like they were used to ( Read more... )

Comments 7

rika March 27 2007, 00:49:09 UTC

I admit I more or less had to evolve into that perspective myself. And ( ... )

frogbot March 27 2007, 01:49:37 UTC

> This is a sticky-wicket issue, and I'll admit I still feel pretty
hardassed about this. When it comes down to it, I think...a MUCK is a
MUCK. A MUSH is a MUSH. If you want a MUSH, use a MUSH. Don't use a MUCK.

I totally agree. x_X Turning a MUCK into a MUSH via wacky commands is just a recipe for confusion.

ichijo_akari March 27 2007, 18:44:41 UTC

In general I agree with not picking up the MUSH conventions when using MUCK. I really don't like MUSH style switches at all (Like page/last or whatever) and I admit I'd be pretty reluctant to add any support for those. I also find the & command for setting props to be as backwards as can be, but Moose added it and I'm fine with it just being there, if it makes it easier for MUSH folk to adapt ( ... )

caitsith4 March 27 2007, 06:58:29 UTC

Yeah, I've recently been developing a combat system based on the old VL style system. Right now I'm up to like.. 6 different behavior toggles and like 4 or 5 different field configs. Given a choice tho, I tend to skew modular on a lot of my stuff. Sometimes, custom code can really bite you in the foot, especially in the case of something like MotM ( ... )

ichijo_akari March 27 2007, 18:46:28 UTC

Yeah, I've always known that the inital page version there was one of your early learning projects. But that was years ago. There's no reason such a core communications tool shouldn't have been updated by then, whether by you still learning more about MUF or someone else taking over. It's not like the site hasn't had its share of capable MUF coders over the last 2 - 3 years. :)

-Akari

caitsith4 March 27 2007, 20:55:19 UTC

Yes, but they were all lazy. :O!!!

ashuraou March 29 2007, 01:30:22 UTC

When you added custom color formats to say, that made me love you forever. I think that was around the time I was writing that really weird MPI say program and I was trying to figure out how to get it to parse the quotes without MUF, and then you did it and I was like WHOA. :O ROCKNESS. Plus you added my color scheme. <3

But yeah, you made colors acceptable, since it was easy to implement self-setting colors, in conjunction with good default color schemes for almost everything. You can look at it everything you guys coded and 99% of it didn't blind you.

I agree with everything said about switches. As well as hiding the 'MUCK.' One thing which struck me as weird is how relatively unaltered watchfor was, though. I figured it would totally be +watch/add-ed and such but wasn't.