How did you install Enigma?

I was hoping RetroX would be kind enough to make an implemented list as well as an unimplemented one. It should be easy enough to parse, just check for brackets and it's a function.

OK here is my full proposal for the bot.

1) Two full lists are made of all the implemented and non-implemented GM functions.
2) All the functions on each list are read and posted in individual articles on the wiki, using just the function name as the topic title.
3) All the articles are posted using the Function Example format (if anyone thinks this should be changed then do it now). The function_name(parameters) line within the post can be generated using the function name and parameters read, the rest will just have to remain empty ready for people to fill in. All function from the unimplemented list use the {{Unimplemented}} tag, all functions from the implemented list use the {{Implemented}} tag and are also categorised under [[Category:All_pages_needing_cleanup]] so we know they still need documenting.
4) As for function sets, I think they are still best to all be posted individually. They can be gone over and categorised / documented as a function set when people come to them.

That's it for now, the forum bot can be dealt with later. It's just necessary right now to populate the functions so people are actually able to use the system.

They will populate automatically when the templates are being used, ie when {{implemented}} is used it will automatically categorise to the Template Category. When the wiki bot is created hopefully it should post all the functions using a template. Then functions following the function peer review process should still remain with a template, it will just be changed.

All the functions already documented on the wiki (like the pages you linked to) should be changed to fit in the procedure.

I'm not sure exactly what's best for function sets. It makes sense to post function sets just in a single post, perhaps the title could just be for example draw_text_*. Then the overall system and code can be explained and commented on in a single place. However there will be an issue with making the wiki bot do this (ie it will have to post differently) and I do also think it's right to have a full list of categorised individual functions, so a function can easily be found from a category. It may be best for every function to have an individual page, then all functions in a set can be marked with an extra category. The overall system of the function set can then be explained in the category.

Bump 

I think this would be fine to implement now. I can't see it doing any harm anyway

I was thinking about server space when I was suggested this, but then I just ignored the thought. Thinking back on previous conversations I've witnessed though, it know it is an issue. So I don't know what I was thinking making this suggestion 

You're right that the EDC will be better for this, and easier anyway. The plan is for it to hopefully fund itself through advertisements right?

I've recently been witnessing the benefits of using the wiki as far as organisation goes. I'm wondering if we should set up a system so people can post all their resource projects there such as examples, tutorials, engines, DLLs, graphics, sounds. They will then all be nicely categorised and serve as a place for hosting.

My version mimics the behaviour in GM, so I don't see the problem.

It doesn't mimic the behaviour in GM. Try moving an instance's x position 3*room_width and see if it wraps correctly using your code. If you actually read what code I use you will see I am specifically catering for this.

Though actually my code doesn't completely mimic GM's, it in fact works better. I believe GM's code goes more like this:

Code Select Expand

  if (hor)
  {
    const double wdis = room_width + margin*2;
    if (inst->x > room_width + margin)
    {
      inst->x -= wdis*ceil((inst->x - (room_width + margin))/wdis);
    }
    else if (inst->x < -margin)
    {
      inst->x += wdis*ceil(((-margin) - inst->x)/wdis);
    }
  }
  if (vert)
  {
    const double hdis = room_height + margin*2;
    if (inst->y > room_height + margin)
    {
      inst->y -= hdis*ceil((inst->y - (room_height + margin))/hdis);
    }
    else if (inst->y < -margin)
    {
      inst->y += hdis*ceil(((-margin) - inst->y)/hdis);
    }
This means that when the margin is set to a high negative value, ie more than half the room_width or something and both if statements are true it doesn't actually wrap and just moves the instance continuously left/up. By leaving the else out it wraps correctly mirrored which is a better way to handle things.

May I suggest that all contributed functions should come with some example/unit test to prove correctness? If not at contribution-time, then at least before being approved.

I have added it as a suggestion that an example files should be submitted. I don't think it's necessary to force it though, a user with SVN access should be capable of judging the reliability of the testing.

@IsmAvatar: I have made those changes.

We might want to consider different images instead of the bullshit for the several review stages, so it is more easy to recognise the stage of the function upon glance.

I have added another template and category:

Implemented - Needs Documentation

What I suggest we do is get RetroX to generate a list of both unimplemented functions and implemented functions. Then we can add them to the wiki using the bot at the same time. The unimplemented functions can be posted using the {{unimplemented}} tag and the implemented functions can be posted using the same format but just tagged to {{committed - needs documentation}} instead.

A few things about the function example, ...

Edit the function example page to whatever you think it should look like.

Also we need if possible to automatically turn all those functions in the current unimplemented function list into links to their own page.

That list isn't really needed. They will all categorize automatically when we add them: http://enigma-dev.org/docs/Wiki/Category:GM_Functions:Unimplemented

OK I've done all the templates and categories I think we need:

Unimplemented
Review
Testing
To Commit
Implemented

I think this is a good approval process to go through.

I never said it was less efficient, I said it was different. My code is 'less efficient' for a reason: because it works better.

I have created an example on the wiki (feel free to edit it):
http://enigma-dev.org/docs/Wiki/GM_function_example

[1) background_showcolor is not used]

EDIT:

Found the issue once and for all. The sprite_width has not been set and thus is equal to 0. I was dividing by it and assigning to image_angle which is why the sprite was not shown.

That means the only problem actually is:
1) background_showcolor is not used