ENIGMA Development Environment
Website is in read-only mode due to a recent attack.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Josh @ Dreamland

Announcements / Re: Fresh Topic
« on: August 12, 2009, 03:41:55 PM »
Linux is all right, once you finally get it working. And that's never an easy task, it should seem.

Laugh all you want. I like the idea of having the work divided up into different parsers that are meant to do different tasks.
And until you can produce a working token tree parser to do everything mine does--which I promise you'll never be able to do, be it because of impatience or lack of skill which other teams have exhibited even with a parser *generator*--I suggest you just drop it.

In other words,
You'll never get a parser to work as well as mine does. Sure, I could easily turn it into a token tree at this point, or probably a regular token list. But it's much simpler to look at this way, and I'm not allocating structures to hold one fucking byte apiece.

And if your concern is efficiency, I'll smack you. Because the slowest parser is still faster than greased lightning, and the syntax checker (which will be used a lot more often) is unbeatable. Takes const char*, allocates NOTHING. Iterates ONCE.

I don't want to hear about the holy grail of easy-to-write parsers that anyone and their sister can screw up anyway. I just don't.

The other releases handled strings the same way, don't worry. They must all be "" for C++, but you can use them just like you do in GM and the parser will handle it.

General ENIGMA / Re: I got to thinking.
« on: August 12, 2009, 03:35:40 PM »
Objects have been classes since R1, Russell...

Announcements / Fresh Topic
« on: August 11, 2009, 05:01:38 PM »
That other one wandered off.
Anyway, this is progress:

Code: [Select]
int a = 0 if a = 1 b=2c=3     else d=4 e=5 f='test removal of strings'g="poop"  endorphin = /*removal of comments*/ 6 motherlicker = 7 //or eight
 end break label: goto label awful_code() a=b=c + d  *  e / f do do a = b until c until d if 1if 0else else c()return 0  /*

Parses to

Code: [Select]
int a = 0;
if(a = 1)
  b = 2;
c = 3;
else d = 4;
e = 5;
f = "test removal of strings";
g = "poop";
endorphin = 6;
motherlicker = 7;
goto label;
a = b = c + d * e / f;
do do a = b;
  else c();
return 0;

And yes, I know the syntax is invalid. The parser doesn't care.
Here's another:

Code: [Select]
long unsigned int a

b = 0
cd = 'str'+"ing"

while a a--
while c

do until 0

with a b.c = e
if d exit

Code: [Select]
long unsigned int  a;
b = 0;
cd = "string";
  a = b - 0;
  c = d - 1;
    a --;
  b . c = e;

Nothing you didn't see in R3. Except else; else and some indenting.
The difference is the mechanism.

Notice the first statement: int a = 0;
In R3, this was done with some sketchy additions to the parser; it wasn't originally planned to support that. But now it's an official part. What's this mean?
This means that additional types, including structures that I know the more intelligent users will grow to love, can be added and used withing EDL.

What's left:
Make begin and end actually work, instead of acting like a statement XD
switch() magic
with() supermagic (I have the perfect plan)
Re-fetching declared variables (five minute job thanks to the parser's system)
Pass struct{} and the like to CFile parser, as those are its forte
Make sure syntax checker supports struct and the like

I dug up the new instance system. (Irony, yes, but I'll take it).

I've been hopping back and forth between Linux and Windows. I want to re-commit all the code to the SVN to make that process easier. Not to mention it'll make things better for me considering my college schedule I've been sorting out over the last couple of days.

(The thing's terrible. It's like Swiss cheese; three hour gaps on a good day ;_; )

Anyway, what else... Future plans for before the release.

Incorporate at least backgrounds, possibly sounds, but I'm not sure.
Make sure there's an updater. This will make releases cost less blood.
Test the new instance system with various options set (there are three things to set with two or three choices each.)
Implement a derivative of the string class specifically for ENIGMA. (this will fix so much, efficiency wise)

...And that's it. I was expecting more, but the list is looking short. I like that.

Announcements / Re: Subject
« on: August 11, 2009, 04:41:13 PM »
People won't even mind the wait, if I finish the updater.

Meaning there'd be a small update every here and there, perhaps even a big one, but it'd eventually need re-published.

Announcements / Re: Subject
« on: August 11, 2009, 03:48:06 PM »
I hope so :3
</religious war>, or I'll change all your signatures to state your support for a random religion.

SHUPAER123'S HOME / Re: Linux Game maker
« on: August 10, 2009, 02:08:57 PM »
Let him have his fun.
Free speech, and all that.

General ENIGMA / Re: C++ operators in EDL
« on: August 10, 2009, 02:06:45 PM »
R4 should handle operators. It basically just has to ignore them; it might not even check that the class has an overload for that operator.

"vec3 v;" will be legal in R4, which is the key.

Function Peer Review / Re: GML?
« on: August 10, 2009, 02:04:48 PM »
They're Windows. XP, too.

Function Peer Review / Re: GML?
« on: August 10, 2009, 10:19:50 AM »
nope, I have computers at my school that won't run GM at all.
That's only because they don't have Direct3D installed, though.

General ENIGMA / Re: I got to thinking.
« on: August 10, 2009, 08:50:32 AM »
It'd be hell getting with() to be able to call member functions. It was a big enough pain deciding what to do with instance_destroy().

Announcements / Re: Subject
« on: August 10, 2009, 08:30:00 AM »
He thinks I'm paying two cents to go to hell?

General ENIGMA / Re: I got to thinking.
« on: August 09, 2009, 10:18:16 PM »
Anything C++ can do, R4 should be able to understand. Right in with the rest of your EDL.

Function Peer Review / Re: GML?
« on: August 09, 2009, 09:34:44 PM »
I like the name much better when no one knows what it stands for.

I often bash GML as being Game Markup Language. <game><mmo><error="fail">Your card doesn't support this awesomeness.</error></mmo></game>

But all the closing tags are optional, of course.

General ENIGMA / Re: I got to thinking.
« on: August 09, 2009, 09:26:23 PM »
Yes, the parameter in the <> to list is the type to contain. Can often help with speed, though when dealing with linked lists, not sure how much. (No benchmark to date).

With map, it's map<keytype, valuetype>. I'll write some of this in the help file.

General ENIGMA / Re: I got to thinking.
« on: August 09, 2009, 04:45:58 PM »
How about
Code: [Select]
list<var> list1;Or, implicitly, as it may be possible to do:
Code: [Select]
list list1;
Code: [Select]

Maybe list::add can be added... I'd much rather not, obviously. But yeah.

Code: [Select]
map a;
a["key"] = "value";
a["another key"] = 10;
a[-100.5] = "weee";

map<int> b;
b[-10] = "wee";
b[-10] = 4;

map<int,int> c;