On Mon, 4 Dec 2006 14:17:58 +0000
Stuart J Urquhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 4 Dec 2006, at 12:44, Alban Bedel wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 1 Dec 2006 14:30:05 -0800
> > "Jesse McGrew" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/1/06, Alban Bedel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Some more compiler support for strings could help here too. The code
> >> gets repetitive having to type this all the time:
> >>
> >> sentence = 0;
> >> sentence[0] = "...";
> >> dialogAdd(sentence);
> >>
> >> (This compiles, but crashes the VM: sentence = "...";)
> >>
> >> If the compiler allocated some of the array addresses for its own
> >> use,
> >> we could directly use strings (or lists?) in script calls, and they'd
> >> be passed via temporary arrays:
> >>
> >> dialogAdd("foo bar baz");
> >> // same as: TEMP1 = 0; TEMP1[0] = "foo bar baz"; dialogAdd(TEMP1);
> >
> > I thought a bit about that too. However it probably won't be trivial.
> > Currently there is no checks done on the arguments passed to scripts.
> > There is 2 reasons, first there is only one internal type (int),
> > second
> > if some arguments are "missing" the VM set them to 0 and this is
> > sometimes used to have optional arguments.
> > So the first step would be to implement arg type checking and add some
> > syntax to show optional arguments (like in C++). Type checking is
> > requiered if the compiler need to handle some types in a special way.
> > Then some extra code would be needed to handle such "hidden" variables
> > (ie. check that there is some free variable to use, generate the extra
> > code, etc).
> >
>
> I was just thinking. The above example could be simplified a bit by
> having macro's #define'd to reduce the repetitive typing to just 1
> line, e.g.:
>
> #define GEN_SENTENCE(str) sentence = 0; sentence[0] = str;
> dialogAdd(GEN_SENTENCE("You code like a dairy farmer"));
> dialogAdd(GEN_SENTENCE("Your COBOL coding days are over!"));
> dialogAdd(GEN_SENTENCE("Run Away!!!");
Right, one could also (ab)use the preprocessor.
> Although i haven't even tested macro's in scummc (apart from the
> typical #include), so for all i know they might not be fully supported.
Macro with arguments are not supported (yet). That's of course planned
but as the need didn't arise until now ...
> In any case, its great to see some progress being made. I checked out
> a copy of the room example from svn, and was quite impressed by the
> conversation with santa - although i noticed the actor speech text
> was being printed in the middle of the screen, nowhere near the
> characters, which seemed quite odd.
This might be because the actor is near the border of the room,
or the script is missing something. Something more to investigate ;)
> And then there's Santa being an
> actor and an object, though i guess if it works, there's nothing
> wrong with it :)
The object is just used as a placeholder for the code. That way handeling
sentences involving an actor doesn't need too much special cases compared
to normal objects.
That code will need more comments to be a good example, explaining why
things are done in that way, perhaps also mention possible alternative
implementations, etc
Albeu
_______________________________________________
ScummC-general mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/scummc-general
