On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:10 AM, buginator <buginato...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Because we have lots of events being called (and more being added all >> the time) that not every script should be forced to implement just to >> make the warnings disappear. > > Eh ? You are inviting bugs then, as can be seen by 001ef35faf1.
I've fixed up the lint tool, and will be adding code to detect such errors in it. > The codebase is still firing off events and if it isn't in the script > then it should be yelling that it can't find it, otherwise you open up > a can of worms, making pretty much all bug reports much, much harder > to see if the problem is in the codebase, or if it just happens to be > a script that didn't implement said "missing" function. What? Surely the bug reports will be harder to read when they are full of meaningless warnings. > If the script writer wants to ignore said "missing" function, then > they can NOP the function in question. This slows down processing of events *significantly*. And then I add a new event, and all old scripts start to produce warnings. Some scripts will then contain a few functions of real code, and dozens of no-op functions. Ugly. > We definitely should be warning/throwing out errors on all "missing" > triggers or events. Triggers, yes. Events, no. >>> So far, the >>> debuggability of javascript seems not much better than that of wzscript, >>> maybe integrating a QScriptEngineDebugger would help there. Feel free. I do not see the need, personally. > if we still want to stick with JS Not doing that is such a stupid idea at this point, I don't really know how to respond. - Per _______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
