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

2221
Proposals / Re: execute_string via Google V8
« on: March 28, 2010, 07:25:27 PM »
Oh, but they're just universally fleeting in the eyes of any beholder who has experienced a functional language?
Certainly I'd hate them if I ever got an amazing implicit list type.

It's wonderful if you like other languages. Please quit pretending that everyone does/will accordingly. <_<"

2222
Proposals / Re: execute_string via Google V8
« on: March 28, 2010, 12:57:29 PM »
The idea is for this to require very little effort. It'd be almost entirely code-generated code. But yes, I could find better things to spend time on.

2223
Proposals / Re: execute_string via Google V8
« on: March 28, 2010, 12:28:42 PM »
Hah, true. Don't worry though, this isn't to be implemented yet. I added that C compiler because I don't want more mediocrity; GM users are content with that for now, but I want my beautiful C++ types. And I like the idea of structures. So I just went all-out.

This, however, does not appeal to me. So I will let it sit here until it gets eroded smooth by anyone who posts on the matter.

2224
Announcements / Re: Collisions
« on: March 28, 2010, 10:04:10 AM »
Actually, are you sure that casting that initializer as var will properly allocate them? (I'd cast as variant anyway, but...)

2225
Proposals / Re: Idea for var
« on: March 28, 2010, 09:58:29 AM »
I want the new var to offer casts to all scalars, optional overloads for iostream and fstream, and a copy-on-write system for arrays (allowing arrays to be passed as function parameters and script arguments).

To preserve speed, we sacrifice memory. It's always been that way with ENIGMA since I found a clue what I was doing. I thought of methods that would make var eight bytes, but I don't want to implement them as they waste instructions.

2226
Proposals / Re: execute_string via Google V8
« on: March 28, 2010, 09:54:25 AM »
Only on C++ things that aren't in GML. Since execute_string is more for compatibility, I'm not concerned with having it support C, really.

2227
Announcements / Re: Collisions
« on: March 27, 2010, 10:09:54 PM »
Man, that's hackish even by my standards. I'll do it.

2228
Proposals / Re: Collaboration by Timestamps
« on: March 27, 2010, 05:58:50 PM »
Quite.

2229
Announcements / Re: Collisions
« on: March 27, 2010, 12:32:18 PM »
Bahaha, yes, all of those things.

2230
Announcements / Re: Collisions
« on: March 27, 2010, 09:06:24 AM »
Game_boy:
Not at present; I could generate one, but I don't think some of the systems I coded are all in there. Like text file manipulation and DLL's.

The 11th plague of Egypt:
Assuming you're talking about ds_lists, they are global. Don't worry, this new system won't break ds_list; it'll supply an alternative to them. Lists are stored somewhat like sprites; a global array of things GM users don't understand, which they can access by an integer from absolutely anywhere. So, a=ds_list_create() will add to that list, "list a;" won't.

2231
Proposals / Re: execute_string via Google V8
« on: March 27, 2010, 08:59:16 AM »
What? That had nothing to do with pointers... GM users won't even know it's running V8 or that anything is being passed by pointers. It'll look to them just like it did in GM.

2232
Proposals / Re: execute_string via Google V8
« on: March 27, 2010, 08:52:12 AM »
The same way it works in GM:
Code: [Select]
var xx,yy;
xx = 0;
yy = 5;
execute_string("xx="+string(yy)+";");
show_message(string(xx));
Shows zero; execute_string() gets its own scope.

Now, had I used "x" as you proposed, it also would have behaved like GM: execute_string() would call V8, V8 would see "x" which is implemented as an accessor. The accessor will load the current instance (as determined by the C++ proceedings of ENIGMA)'s x coordinate and return it for the JavaScript to use and to write to. Accessors have both a read and and write C++ event.

And by "own scope," I mean a scope from which it cannot find "var xx" and must use this->xx.

2233
Announcements / Re: Collisions
« on: March 27, 2010, 08:21:53 AM »
Not that I think anyone that needs the min() or max() of that many arguments shouldn't be using an array and iterating it him/herself.
It's just nice to shed GM's limits.

2234
Announcements / Re: Collisions
« on: March 27, 2010, 07:59:33 AM »
I think he's remembering the good ol' days when I was satisfied just to have 4x as many as Mark.

2235
Proposals / Re: execute_string via Google V8
« on: March 26, 2010, 10:24:20 PM »
That wasn't very constructive.