[poll] How many unfinished WIP's do you have on your HD?
Gadget
Curious as always,
Harry
-------------
It's a bird...
It's a plane...
No, it's... Gadget?
-------------------
To send mail remove SPAMBLOCK from adress.
Seebs
Just one, and I haven't given up yet, I've just been busy.
-s
--
Copyright 2002, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / se...@plethora.net
$ chmod a+x /bin/laden Please do not feed or harbor the terrorists.
C/Unix wizard, Pro-commerce radical, Spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon!
Consulting, computers, web hosting, and shell access: http://www.plethora.net/
Quintin Stone
> ... and why didn't you finish them?
Two. The first I'm fixing the stuff found the beta testing. The second
is only in design stage. No code yet at all. I'm considering TADS3 for
that one.
/====================================================================\
|| Quintin Stone O- > "You speak of necessary evil? One ||
|| Weapons Master & Coder < of those necessities is that if ||
|| Rebel Programmers Society > innocents must suffer, the guilty must ||
|| st...@rps.net < suffer more." -- Mackenzie Calhoun ||
|| http://www.rps.net/ > "Once Burned" by Peter David ||
\====================================================================/
Jon Ingold
Nine. All impossible to code.
Jon
"Gadget" <gad...@SPAMBLOCKhaha.demon.nl> wrote in message
news:4g9l4vgs0sk4h9mm3...@4ax.com...
dgr...@cs.csbuak.edu
> ... and why didn't you finish them?
> Curious as always,
> Harry
If you're talking IF, two. Frotz is always a work in progress. The other
WIP is a game which is around half done.
--
David Griffith
Joe Mason
> ... and why didn't you finish them?
Four. Two unfinished and definitely abandoned, and two I mean to get
back to.
I was in the middle of revising _In the End_ to take into account the
competition reviews (this was way back in '96) when I realized I was
getting to depressed by the "game", and it really wasn't worth it. At
last check, the code I had didn't build because I was halfway through
making changes - I'm not even sure if I've still got it any more.
That's a shame, because I would have liked to release it. (Nonetheless,
even if unfinished, this was at least published.)
I started a James Bond game, for which I wrote the Inform Realtime Hack
which is in the archive. I got almost a scene done when I decided I had
no idea where I wanted the plot to go next, beyond the gimmick of having
a two-hour comp game with a real two-hour countdown. I may go back to
it someday: I would like to do a fast-paced text adventure, but I don't
have many good scenes in mind. (I want more swashbuckling IF!) I think
this one counts as "definitely abandoned", cause I'll probably start
from scratch.
In my last year of high school I wrote the prologue to a Big-Ass Fantasy
Game for a class project. As a prologue it's complete, but I charged
off in the wrong direction when expanding it and, again, I think it
doesn't compile any more. I'm definitely going to go back to this one
(because somebody I showed it to keeps bringing it up...) but I'm not
sure if it'll be IF or a novel. This one I stopped because I realized
the magnitude of it, and decided to finish a shorter idea that I was
working on at the same time first.
That shorter idea has now been in development since 1998, and still not
released. And it's not big, either - I tend to leave it for 6 months
then work on it for a week. It'll be out this year. I promise.
(I also have 2 games that I started before _In the End_ that never got
finished, but I think I've completely deleted them because I wasn't sure
where to go with them.)
Joe
David Jackson
>
> Nine. All impossible to code.
>
> Jon
>
Impossible to code, or merely beyond your capability to code?
-David
Ben Caplan
> ... and why didn't you finish them?
Two (and they're both _actually_ In Progress, not just abandoned) :
VedaQuest (which would take at least two pages to explain succinctly), and
ai.t, the generic TADS2 AI framework.
Kathleen
Of those that are finishable (ignoring the dozen or so (no, not
kidding) that died an early death due to bad ideas, bad
implementation, or (more usually) both)... 3.
Game1 was set aside after 18 months work because it was getting big
and I wanted to release something small first, so TheCove was born
(and released). Then Game1 was started up again, and set aside because
it was too big for the Comp (which I wanted to enter), and thus
Masquerade was born (and released). Game1 was picked up and dropped
for another Comp game (PrizedPossession - released) then picked up and
dropped for another art show game - Game2. I worked for awhile on that
when SpringComp02 was announced and I stupidly thought I could do both
(Game3 was born), and *neither* game was finished - though the
ArtShow02 didn't happen. Picked up Game1, and then Game2 (both
briefly), then decided to finish Game3 for Comp02, but beta was a
disaster and RealLife had different ideas as well. When I could
finally IF again, I went back to Game2 but then SpringComp03 announced
and so I picked up Game3 again, figuring I would finish it in time
then go back to Game2 for ArtShow03 and get both done in time. Right.
And though Doe has been quiet, my testers have not and now I'm
seriously considering changing my hobby to Stamp Collecting.
Kathleen (aren't you sorry you asked?)
-- Excuse me while I dance a little jig of despair
Thomas Thurman
> ... and why didn't you finish them?
1. A potential comp entry that got way too big to play in two hours,
and I realised that I didn't know how the middle was going to hang
together, so it got sort of abandoned. Still ticking over quietly in my
mind, though.
2. A reinterpretation of a graphical adventure (vaugely King's-Quest-
alike) I wrote in 1992, as a text adventure. I may actually do some more
work on this soon: it's an interesting challenge converting between the
two, not at a technical level so much as a conceptual level. Some things
work in text that won't work in graphics, and vice versa.
3. A collaboration; I won't say more than that because the other person
isn't on raif at present. In progress, and it's being fun so far.
4. A speculative idea that may turn into short-story IF when I have more
of a clue how the end will turn out.
5. Do non-games count? http://gnusto.mozdev.org is still a work in
progress.
T
Jaap van der Velde
<gad...@SPAMBLOCKhaha.demon.nl> wrote:
>... and why didn't you finish them?
Only one serious IFWIP.
The why: I started it when I was still only learning Inform. Thanks to
this group and due to new insights gained by trial and error with the
language, new ideas keep incorporating themselves into the game.
I planned it as a 4 chapter/act piece, but only the first chapter is
more or less finished. So I guess the real reason for not finishing it
is 'striving for perfection'.
I figure: if I'm not content with it, the situation may arise that
-nobody- likes it. I'd rather shoot for a certain score of 1 than a
possible score of many. (especially considering the small audience)
Also, I feel that the field of IF-languages is one that's still only
in its infancy, compared to more popular languages, despite its long
history. Although there are some fine basic languages out there
(including Inform and TADS) with useful libraries, there are hardly
any decent development environments that really help the language. I
think many starting IF developers/writers would be off to a faster
start with a decent IDE or something like it.
Think about what environments like Visual C, Delphi and Visual Basic
have done for respectively C++, Pascal and Basic. Remember plodding
along with those oldies to get a simple menu-based application to
work? Now, developing that kind of application is a breeze and more
time can be spent on thinking of truly useful applications. Also, the
learning curve is much less steep.
I think an environment intergrating authoring, designing, compiling,
debugging as well as sets of libraries and comprehensive help would
help IF as a whole and many IFWIPs.
I am aware of initiatives like IF-IDE, IF-Builder and Implementor.
But I think none of those sofar are close to giving IF the impulse
it needs to really take off. Now, I don't wish to offend the authors
(Michael Perlini, Jeff Nyman, Donnie Russell) but I think these
editors, although a lot better than run-of-the-mill text-editors in
some ways, still lack a lot of the developing power an environment
like Delphi 1 offered. Of course, a little less may be needed, as
there are no visuals involved in the desired results. (at least,
not in the case of Inform)
But a large part of the strength of popular IDE's for application
development lies in their modularity and the ability to easily
incorporate previously developed components. And I think the second
strong point for those environments is the visual approach. Maybe
that is where the future of IF-development lies: in a useful and
usable visual metaphor. One that can be translated to an interface
to visually develop IF. (for clarity: I'm not thinking visual parser
generators or anything, but a visual environment in which to build
'traditional' IF)
Am I reaching here? Is this feasible? Has it already been proven
to be an official 'bad idea'? Or is it just the staggering amount
of work that would be required, that keeps a truly worthy IDE from
coming along?
Greetings,
JAAP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity,
and I'm not sure about the former."
-- Albert Einstein
Jaap van der Velde
<ja...@nospam.thanks> wrote:
>Am I reaching here? Is this feasible? Has it already been proven
>to be an official 'bad idea'? Or is it just the staggering amount
>of work that would be required, that keeps a truly worthy IDE from
>coming along?
I've spotted the Visual Inform debacle on Google Groups. It appears
David Cornelson (aka Jarb) has spent quite some time and effort on
an IDE for Inform, but apparently discontinued his work due to a
lack of interest or involvement of his testers.
Jarb concludes:
> I would buck up and learn Inform the hard way no matter what you
> use to create a game. There are nuances to IF writing that you
> will never learn from a GUI editor.
To read his original post, google GoogleGroups with '"Visual Inform"
discontinued'.
Grtz,
David Welbourn
and objects. I seem to come up with a few interesting ideas that I want to
do, but I get completely stuck with...
* What's the story? I come up with ideas that aren't stories, but gimmicks
or skeletal frames for a story. Fleshing out the skeleton is difficult. I
brainstorm ideas, but rarely do I think up something that seems to fit. I'm
basically trying to pastiche my games from a multitude of sources; like
trying to put together a jigsaw puzzle from pieces lost about the city.
* What are the puzzles? I love puzzley IF games, and I've played quite a
few, but that doesn't seem to help me come up with puzzles of my own. And
when I do think up a puzzle, it's too easy, too hard, too unmotivated, or is
a cliche that's been done many times before.
* What's the geography? I've been told that I should come up with the
geography first. But I get into this endless loop in my mind: "how do I know
what geography I need when I don't know what the puzzles are?" versus "how
do I know what puzzles will fit in if I don't know what the geography or
story is?"
Ah, well. Hopefully I'll make a breakthrough in one of my so-called WIPs so
I can actually get around to coding it. It'd be nice to see my 'interesting
ideas' in a game instead of just watching them playing pinball in my head.
-- David Welbourn
Neil Cerutti
Is there any practical difference?
--
Neil Cerutti <cer...@trans-video.net>
David Jackson
> In article <pan.2003.02.12....@yahoo.com>, David
> Jackson wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 21:43:28 +0000, Jon Ingold wrote:
>>>
>>> Nine. All impossible to code.
>>>
>>> Jon
>>>
>>
>> Impossible to code, or merely beyond your capability to code?
>
> Is there any practical difference?
Well, yes, of course. If it's beyond your ability to code, then you can
always seek out help, here on RAIF or elsewhere.
-David Jackson
Neil Cerutti
D. R. Porterfield
keeps growing. The game world is extensive, with a lot of outdoor
locations, so there's the "macro" aspect of making sure the geography
is consistent, as well as the "micro" aspect of implementing small
details in each location. It's taking a lot more time than I
originally thought it would. But I'm having fun, so it's okay.
-- David
Thomas Thurman
> David Jackson wrote:
> > Neil Cerutti wrote:
> > > David Jackson wrote:
> > > > Jon Ingold wrote:
> > > > > Nine. All impossible to code.
> > > Is there any practical difference?
> > Well, yes, of course. If it's beyond your ability to code, then
> > you can always seek out help, here on RAIF or elsewhere.
> But nothing is impossible.
But some problems are, strictly speaking, impossible to code. I doubt
that Jon was attempting to solve the halting problem in Inform, but you
never know these days. :)
T
Stark Springs
> In article <pan.2003.02.12....@yahoo.com>, David
> Jackson wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 21:43:28 +0000, Jon Ingold wrote:
> >>
> >> Nine. All impossible to code.
> >>
> >> Jon
> >>
> >
> > Impossible to code, or merely beyond your capability to code?
>
> Is there any practical difference?
There is. There might be people out there willing to help with the
coding :)
I used to have this time travel problem that for the longest time I
thought it's impossible to code. Then I figured out it requires a bit
of rewriting in the compiler. Some people might not be willing to go
that far.
Stark
David Cornelson
Geez. Hmm.
I have two significant stories that I'm trying to implement. One is
being transitioned to a collaboration, the other is still writing
itself in my head, despite the fact that I had written several scenes
and then abandoned the code.
I consider both of these to be high-quality stories. I have been
working on them for nearly two years.
Then there's the junk. I have probably a dozen started short games,
some abandoned for good, others I may go back to if the mood suits me.
Then there's games that I can't write because our current toolsets
don't support what I want to build, namely a very tightly controlled
multi-player client-server gameworld.
The collaboration game is even going slowly because I just don't have
enough time to sit and really concentrate on it. My whole attitude
about releasing serious IF is that if it takes years, so be it.
Jarb
Rikard Peterson
> ... and why didn't you finish them?
Blame Harry for asking, here comes my answer.
One that's put on ice, and I don't know if I'll ever get back to it,
or even if it will be a text adventure when (if) it's finished.
Instead I'm currently working on a team project that will be a
graphical adventure. It probably suites me better since while I like
text based IF a lot I'm much more skilled writing music than writing
text and I can do better things with my pen if I use it to draw than
if I write words with it.
I would like to do something text based in the future, though. The
one I mentioned in the beginning might become some sort of hybrid,
like Legend's games. Or maybe a pure thext game, but that would
require me to improve my writing skills a lot. But that's just
speculation. Right now the current game is to be finished first, and
that won't be anytime soon. In the meantime I'll read this group and
try to learn things. :)
Rikard
Craig Thomson
<ja...@nospam.thanks> wrote:
>I think an environment intergrating authoring, designing, compiling,
>debugging as well as sets of libraries and comprehensive help would
>help IF as a whole and many IFWIPs.
[...]
>Am I reaching here? Is this feasible? Has it already been proven
>to be an official 'bad idea'? Or is it just the staggering amount
>of work that would be required, that keeps a truly worthy IDE from
>coming along?
This seems to come up at regular intervals, people get excited about
it, then it dies. I can think of a few attempts at various forms if
IDE that have spluttered out.
FWIW, I agree with you. I think that it would be very helpful to have
a good IDE that would allow you to create room layouts, have syntax
colouring, integrate with a compiler and debugger.
I think that reasons that projects fail to turn into full supported
tools is because of two main reasons:
* People moan about the (necessarily) platform-dependance of such a
tool
* The more serious authors already have a well-honed way of writing,
coding and debugging
These lead to not many people actually using/contriuting to the tools
and they just stagnate in early stages. I think there is an
opern-source (or GPL or some other form) editor in the pipeline.
Perhaps that will lead somewhere.
Craig
Adam Thornton
Neil Cerutti <ne...@norwich.edu> wrote:
>But nothing is impossible.
That's what being a scientist is all about!
Adam
Adam Thornton
Hunh.
_Mentula Macanus: Apocolocyntosis_. In short, my Real Job keeps me Real
Busy, and I don't have the energy to do a project of this magnitude.
Latin.h is *hard*.
_Flathead_. Very old, and very whiny. I may not even have the source
anymore. I started it almost six years ago in the aftermath of a
terrible breakup. I'm in a very, very different place--physically,
emotionally, fiscally, temporally--now than I was then, and I have a
strong desire not to return there.
Adam
Jon Ingold
> > Nine. All impossible to code.
> Impossible to code, or merely beyond your capability to code?
Let's put this diplomatically: well beyond the call of duty. Though some are
impossible to code simply because I don't know how the code can do what it
needs to do - if you can think of a way of disambiguating between two
strands of the same rope, both looped round the handle of an urn and the bar
of a cell-window other than having one turn magically pink I'll be glad to
hear it. Actually, I wouldn't, because I shelved that game so long ago I've
forgotten how the damn rope works now anyway.
Other problems include the hoary old chesnut of the problem-solving npc, and
an algorithm for winning two-dimensional Nim.
Which reminds me - a friend of mine recently worked out to build a computer
in an Inform game on which you can play the game itself. (You can't play the
game in the game of this game, however).
Jon
dgr...@cs.csbuak.edu
bd
>> ... and why didn't you finish them?
>
> Geez. Hmm.
>
> I have two significant stories that I'm trying to implement. One is
> being transitioned to a collaboration, the other is still writing
> itself in my head, despite the fact that I had written several scenes
> and then abandoned the code.
>
> I consider both of these to be high-quality stories. I have been
> working on them for nearly two years.
>
> Then there's the junk. I have probably a dozen started short games,
> some abandoned for good, others I may go back to if the mood suits me.
>
> Then there's games that I can't write because our current toolsets
> don't support what I want to build, namely a very tightly controlled
> multi-player client-server gameworld.
Try MOO: http://www.moo.mud.org
It's designed for multi-player text games. You can strictly control it, or
allow users to do (restricted) modifications.
> The collaboration game is even going slowly because I just don't have
> enough time to sit and really concentrate on it. My whole attitude
> about releasing serious IF is that if it takes years, so be it.
>
> Jarb
--
Freenet distribution (temporary): http://0.0.0.0:8891/monbXCBZKKE/
Something's rotten in the state of Denmark.
-- Shakespeare
bd
> On Thu, 13 Feb 2003 10:33:48 +0100, Jaap van der Velde
> <ja...@nospam.thanks> wrote:
>
>>I think an environment intergrating authoring, designing, compiling,
>>debugging as well as sets of libraries and comprehensive help would
>>help IF as a whole and many IFWIPs.
>
> [...]
>
>>Am I reaching here? Is this feasible? Has it already been proven
>>to be an official 'bad idea'? Or is it just the staggering amount
>>of work that would be required, that keeps a truly worthy IDE from
>>coming along?
>
> This seems to come up at regular intervals, people get excited about
> it, then it dies. I can think of a few attempts at various forms if
> IDE that have spluttered out.
>
> FWIW, I agree with you. I think that it would be very helpful to have
> a good IDE that would allow you to create room layouts, have syntax
> colouring, integrate with a compiler and debugger.
>
> I think that reasons that projects fail to turn into full supported
> tools is because of two main reasons:
> * People moan about the (necessarily) platform-dependance of such a
> tool
Write is in Java or Perl or Python or something.
> * The more serious authors already have a well-honed way of writing,
> coding and debugging
Make it configurable - if the user only wants syntax coloring, so be it.
If the user wants an automapper, GUI interface to designing classes,
indents, etc, that's fine too.
> These lead to not many people actually using/contriuting to the tools
> and they just stagnate in early stages. I think there is an
> opern-source (or GPL or some other form) editor in the pipeline.
> Perhaps that will lead somewhere.
--
John Colagioia
Gadget wrote:
> ... and why didn't you finish them?
Some of them have evolved into testbeds. My first "game" ever, for
example, still lurks around my hard drive. It's an incoherent space
with arbitrary props, spellcasting, a couple of randomly-wandering
NPCs, a monetary and clothing system, and probably a dozen other
things I'm forgetting. The point is, it's no longer a game so much
as a handy source file where I can try out stupid ideas without
ruining something otherwise workable.
A couple are effectively finished, lacking only final testing, but I
decided I didn't like them. I may go back to a couple of them, one
day, but probably not.
There's another category of openings looking for plot development. I
can think of five works that are pretty much looking for the plot to
be tightened and an ending to be written that I can call satisfying.
Then there are the gimmicks looking for plots. Ideas that I thought
were really nifty--some of which even have a backstory and basic
plot--that have no story to them, yet. I suspect a few of these will
be scavenged for technology to be relocated in a better game, though
there's one where there *is* a story, but I only have the opening and
payoff, and am lacking that connective bit...
Well, you asked...
Greg Ewing (using news.cis.dfn.de)
> My first "game" ever, for
> example, still lurks around my hard drive. It's an incoherent space
> with arbitrary props, spellcasting, a couple of randomly-wandering
> NPCs, a monetary and clothing system, and probably a dozen other
> things I'm forgetting. The point is, it's no longer a game so much
> as a handy source file where I can try out stupid ideas without
> ruining something otherwise workable.
Hmmm, maybe there's a way you could turn it into a game yet.
Let's see, the PC finds a gap in the wall of an old building
and crawls inside, finding himself in an old warehouse full of
strange things. Except it's not really a place, but the inside
of an IF author's mind, and it's filled with pieces of
discarded story ideas...
--
Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept,
University of Canterbury,
Christchurch, New Zealand
http://www.cosc.canterbury.ac.nz/~greg
Michael Iachini
> Three. Maybe four. None of them have been coded up much beyond a few rooms
> and objects. I seem to come up with a few interesting ideas that I want to
> do, but I get completely stuck with...
>
> * What's the story? I come up with ideas that aren't stories, but gimmicks
> or skeletal frames for a story. Fleshing out the skeleton is difficult.
I feel your pain. I only have one IF WIP, but it's been sitting there
for about a year now for that very reason. I have a fun, gimmicky
idea that lends itself to loads of great puzzles, but I have no
compelling way to get the player character into this puzzle world so
that actual players will care about it. Still, I've got some cool
little puzzles coded up, and that may come in handy someday. It's my
first real attempt at IF, and at least it has gotten _somewhere_.
Michael Iachini
Seebs
Jon Ingold <jonny...@netscape.net> wrote:
>Let's put this diplomatically: well beyond the call of duty. Though some are
>impossible to code simply because I don't know how the code can do what it
>needs to do - if you can think of a way of disambiguating between two
>strands of the same rope, both looped round the handle of an urn and the bar
>of a cell-window other than having one turn magically pink I'll be glad to
>hear it. Actually, I wouldn't, because I shelved that game so long ago I've
>forgotten how the damn rope works now anyway.
> PULL THE LEFT ROPE
-s
--
Copyright 2002, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / se...@plethora.net
$ chmod a+x /bin/laden Please do not feed or harbor the terrorists.
C/Unix wizard, Pro-commerce radical, Spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon!
Consulting, computers, web hosting, and shell access: http://www.plethora.net/
Seebs
Craig Thomson <cr...@spam.free> wrote:
>FWIW, I agree with you. I think that it would be very helpful to have
>a good IDE that would allow you to create room layouts, have syntax
>colouring, integrate with a compiler and debugger.
FWIW, I hate syntax coloring in all languages; I no more want keywords in C
in green than I want prepositions in English in green.
And I would be VERY interested in seeing an IDE that can map Janitor.
Jaap van der Velde
>In article <stlo4vo2oil30urjs...@4ax.com>,
>Craig Thomson <cr...@spam.free> wrote:
>>FWIW, I agree with you. I think that it would be very helpful to have
>>a good IDE that would allow you to create room layouts, have syntax
>>colouring, integrate with a compiler and debugger.
>
>FWIW, I hate syntax coloring in all languages; I no more want keywords in C
>in green than I want prepositions in English in green.
Although I disagree, I can imagine. But I think you'll agree that
having an editor point out to you that the identifier you're defining
is already a keyword -is- a plus. Also, a quick compile within the
environment, code insight, parameter lists, online help, etc. etc.
are things that would improve the experience of most programmers.
>And I would be VERY interested in seeing an IDE that can map Janitor.
Does that mean you think there can be no such thing as an adequate
map of Janitor, useful for development? Or does it mean that you are
sceptical that a tool could be developed that automatically generates
a map for Janitor?
If you meant the latter, I agree, but that's hardly the kind of
mapping-ability you'd expect from an IDE. (Ever seen Delphi generate
forms with layout from just the .pas files?) If you meant the former,
I disagree.
And I think there are a number of other features most IF authors would
welcome in an IF IDE. I, for one, would -really- appreciate the
ability to set breakpoints and trace through my code. (which would
require the IDE to have it's own integrated terp, I realise that)
I could start a list of such useful features and I'm sure you'd have
to agree on the use of at least some of them.
My only problem with such an IF IDE is that it requires a stupendous
amount of work to get built. I don't think anyone has that amount of
free time and doing it as a team effort requires a lot of
organisation (enter GPL discussions, or whatever). As a result, most
IF IDE initiatives get stuck somewhere in the souped-up text editor
stage.
Greetings,
JAAP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"You see, but you do not observe."
-- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (1859 - 1930),
(Sherlock Holmes) A Scandal in Bohemia, 1892
Thomas Thurman
> And I think there are a number of other features most IF authors would
> welcome in an IF IDE. I, for one, would -really- appreciate the
> ability to set breakpoints and trace through my code. (which would
> require the IDE to have it's own integrated terp, I realise that)
Or, perhaps, for the terp to have its own integrated debugger.
T
Robin Munn
> amount of work to get built. I don't think anyone has that amount of
> free time and doing it as a team effort requires a lot of
> organisation (enter GPL discussions, or whatever). As a result, most
> IF IDE initiatives get stuck somewhere in the souped-up text editor
> stage.
And I find that the problem with a lot of IDE's, for me at least, is
that I don't like the built-in editor! I'm always surprised at how many
people start out building IDE's by reinventing the wheel *again*,
implementing their own editor -- *again* -- when there are so many good
editors out there that already have features like syntax highlighting,
text folding, automatic line numbering, and all those other handy
features that are so useful in writing code. Why not make a basic
plug-in-like architecture and let the end user of the IDE use whatever
editor he/she wants? I already have a lot of learning time invested in
my favorite editor, Vim, and I can get it to do whatever I want *very*
fast. Spending the time learning the ins and outs of a different editor
would not be worth it for me, so I've rejected all the IDE's I've ever
looked at. One of them, Eclipse (http://www.eclipse.org/), seems to have
a good idea with its plug-in architecture, but there's no Vim plugin for
it, so I don't use Eclipse either.
--
Robin Munn <rm...@pobox.com>
http://www.rmunn.com/
PGP key ID: 0x6AFB6838 50FF 2478 CFFB 081A 8338 54F7 845D ACFD 6AFB 6838
Jaap van der Velde
>And I find that the problem with a lot of IDE's, for me at least, is
>that I don't like the built-in editor! I'm always surprised at how many
>people start out building IDE's by reinventing the wheel *again*,
>implementing their own editor -- *again* -- when there are so many good
>editors out there that already have features like syntax highlighting,
>text folding, automatic line numbering, and all those other handy
>features that are so useful in writing code. Why not make a basic
>plug-in-like architecture and let the end user of the IDE use whatever
>editor he/she wants? I already have a lot of learning time invested in
>my favorite editor, Vim, and I can get it to do whatever I want *very*
>fast.
*pins on "kick me" sign*
But is the problem not the other way around? How many editors are
equiped for plugins that cannot only be launched from the editor,
but which are allowed to -control- the editor to a certain extent?
If I am to trace my code, I need an editor that will allow the
terp, running my compiled code, to manipulate the position of the
cursor; to select the currently relevent code in the correct
file; etc. I think this is the reason all IDE-writers start out
with the same (perhaps partially bad, I'll come to that) idea:
"I need an editor I can control completely, so I'll write one
myself"
I agree with you, that it would be great if everyone could just
plug his favourite editor into any IDE. You'd be able to use Vim
to write Delphi, Visual C or Inform code. But this would require
some kind of standard interface offered by most IDEs and supported
by most editors. This of course is why writing your own editor to
support your own IDE may not be such a bad idea after all.
Perhaps programming languages differ too much to come to a
standard interface that every IDE and editor writer is willing to
support. (you could have a go at it though...)
*pins on large "NO REALLY, KICK ME" sign*
And one more thing: what is it about Vim you like that cannot be
done by a built-in editor in an IDE? If it were to allow you to
define a keymap, arrange windows in any fashion you like and
rearrange the menu to your taste, what more could you want?
Now, I don't intend to start an editor-war here. I have my
preference, which I will keep to myself and you clearly have
yours. But don't you agree that even Vim doesn't allow an IDE
the degree of freedom it needs? And that many good IDE's allow
for sufficient customization to make working in them not only
possible, but pleasant? (and, if not, such an IDE is not an
impossibilty?)
Jaap van der Velde
belongs somewhere else. Wether stopping it or letting it go is the
better option still boggles me, but here I went and tried to stop it.
Jaap van der Velde
>that I don't like the built-in editor! I'm always surprised at how many
>people start out building IDE's by reinventing the wheel *again*,
>implementing their own editor -- *again* -- when there are so many good
>editors out there that already have features like syntax highlighting,
>text folding, automatic line numbering, and all those other handy
>features that are so useful in writing code. Why not make a basic
>plug-in-like architecture and let the end user of the IDE use whatever
>editor he/she wants? I already have a lot of learning time invested in
>my favorite editor, Vim, and I can get it to do whatever I want *very*
>fast.
*pins on "kick me" sign*
Greetings,
Robin Munn
> done by a built-in editor in an IDE? If it were to allow you to
> define a keymap, arrange windows in any fashion you like and
> rearrange the menu to your taste, what more could you want?
Short answer: not duplicating effort. Those features (the keymappings I
like, for instance) are already in Vim, why should I have to reimplement
them?
> Now, I don't intend to start an editor-war here. I have my
> preference, which I will keep to myself and you clearly have
> yours. But don't you agree that even Vim doesn't allow an IDE
> the degree of freedom it needs? And that many good IDE's allow
> for sufficient customization to make working in them not only
> possible, but pleasant? (and, if not, such an IDE is not an
> impossibilty?)
Yes, Vim certainly does need to be reworked to allow it to fit in well
with an IDE -- there was a thread on vim-dev recently about that very
subject.
I think the point I'm trying to make, stripped of all non-essentials, is
that both IDE's and editors should be written with integration in mind.
Editors should have an API to allow them to be manipulated by IDE's, and
IDE's should have an API to talk to editors. This would allow a
decoupling of the editor from the rest of the IDE and would ultimately
be more productive.
Robin Munn
> Please do not respond to this thread. I inadvertently started it, it
> belongs somewhere else. Wether stopping it or letting it go is the
> better option still boggles me, but here I went and tried to stop it.
Fair enough; I already posted one reply but will take any further
discussion to E-mail.
Jaap van der Velde
>Short answer: not duplicating effort. Those features (the keymappings I
>like, for instance) are already in Vim, why should I have to reimplement
>them?
[I was writing a spiky reply, but then I read on...]
>I think the point I'm trying to make, stripped of all non-essentials, is
>that both IDE's and editors should be written with integration in mind.
Then we are in total agreement.
Only a single unanswered question remains: should any one developer
follow the path of idealism or pragmatism? On the one hand, writing
their editor or IDE 'with integration in mind', according to some
standard (which would need to be devised and accepted) will cost a
substantial amount of time and effort and will only pay off if enough
others follow suit.
On the other hand, writing the editor as an independent tool is a
lot quicker and cheaper and who knows, maybe we'll add the API
later, when everybody else has. And to developers of IDE's,
developing an editor is only a small part of the entire effort
anyway.
Once more, we agree on what should be done by all, but for each the
immediate payoff of doing something else seems to be higher and is
independent of the actions of others. Prisoner's dilemma, anyone?
I suppose what is needed, is some organisation (commercial or not)
that sees the need for such a standard and decides to develop it.
But then you might still wonder if compatibility outweighs the huge
amount of extra work for the editor-builder. (I can see how it does
for the IDE-builder, so let's keep them out of that discussion)
Grtz,
JAAP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Such evil deeds could religion prompt."
-- Lucretius (99 BC - 55 BC), De Rerum Natura
Jaap van der Velde
>Jaap van der Velde <n...@spam.thanks> wrote:
>> Please do not respond to this thread. I inadvertently started it, it
[ snip ]
>
>Fair enough; I already posted one reply but will take any further
>discussion to E-mail.
I am sorry, that particular remark was not aimed at you. Nor
was it intended to stop this discussion. I posted it as a
mea culpa for starting a new thread with a subject starting
with 'Re: Re:'.
We are getting slighty off topic though, the discussion started
out with the question wether IF would be helped with an IDE
and if it would, why such an IDE wasn't in existence.
I think we agree there is a need and room for such an IDE, but
the disagreement focuses more on the specifics of the
construction of such an IDE.
Grtz,
JAAP. (who now realizes that, indeed, apologising for inadvertently
starting new threads is a bad idea if no one yelps about it first)
Robin Munn
>>I think the point I'm trying to make, stripped of all non-essentials, is
>>that both IDE's and editors should be written with integration in mind.
>
> Then we are in total agreement.
>
> Only a single unanswered question remains: should any one developer
> follow the path of idealism or pragmatism? On the one hand, writing
> their editor or IDE 'with integration in mind', according to some
> standard (which would need to be devised and accepted) will cost a
> substantial amount of time and effort and will only pay off if enough
> others follow suit.
>
> On the other hand, writing the editor as an independent tool is a
> lot quicker and cheaper and who knows, maybe we'll add the API
> later, when everybody else has. And to developers of IDE's,
> developing an editor is only a small part of the entire effort
> anyway.
>
> Once more, we agree on what should be done by all, but for each the
> immediate payoff of doing something else seems to be higher and is
> independent of the actions of others. Prisoner's dilemma, anyone?
Not really a case of prisoner's dilemma, IMHO. In the prisoner's
dilemma, A's choosing to co-operate would have no effect on B's choice
since choices are independant. In fact, if B knew in advance that A was
going to co-operate, it would clearly be to B's advantage *not* to
co-operate (i.e., to squeal on A). That gets B the maximum benefit; the
Prisoner's Dilemma situation is one of competition.
In development of open-source software (note that I'm specifically
considering only open-source development here), OTOH, maximum benefit is
gained from co-operation, not competition. Editor A and IDE B are both
without a good integration API; but once one adds said API, the other
will derive maximum benefit from doing the same. There's still a
question of "Who will go first?" as the person going first will do more
work than the people going later, but everyone derives benefit from
adding the API eventually.
> I suppose what is needed, is some organisation (commercial or not)
> that sees the need for such a standard and decides to develop it.
>
> But then you might still wonder if compatibility outweighs the huge
> amount of extra work for the editor-builder. (I can see how it does
> for the IDE-builder, so let's keep them out of that discussion)
There was a thread on the vim-dev mailing list not too long ago
(November 2002, I think it was) about integration of Vim as a component
in KDevelop. Also mentioned in that thread was the idea of reworking
Vim's source to be better suited for some kind of IDE-integration API. I
haven't gotten too involved in Vim development before, but this is an
itch I really want scratched -- badly enough to start doing something
about it. And I know other people feel the same way (at least, several
people on the vim-dev list want to see Vim easily integratable into an
IDE). We'll see what happens.
Matthew F Funke
>... and why didn't you finish them?
Five.
Number One is a time-travel game. I'm quite stuck in some technical
details (in-game stuff, not programming issues -- I'm trying to make the
game historically accurate), and am slowly slogging my way through.
Number Two is an attempt at making an interactive game based on
X-COM 1 ("Enemy Unknown" or "UFO Defense", depending on where you are).
It's two-thirds IF and one-third RPG. I haven't actually worked on it for
some time.
Number Three is a murder mystery. I'm trying to really flesh out
some NPCs; I'd like them to be memorable and realistic, which really seems
to mean "complex". There's a lot of writing I'm bogged down in.
Number Four is... well, it's just weird. It's hard to try to pin
down exactly what the game is in just a few sentences. I write a little
on it whenever my creative juices seem to go off in some random and silly
direction, so in structure, it probably resembles the Winchester Mansion.
I'd probably never submit it to other people for playing, since it
probably plays worse than Detective, reads worse than Rybread Celsius, and
smells worse than A.P. Hill.
Number Five is an adventure game that starts out in a typical "Find
The Bomb Before It Explodes" sort of way, but takes some really
interesting (I hope) twists before all is said and done.
The biggest reasons why none of these have been *completed* -- or, at
the very least, submitted for testing -- are simple. First, I am
something of a perfectionist, and this really hurts my ability to submit
things like this in a timely manner. Second, I have been looking for a
job so that I can pay for food and heat... that's put a lot of my
programming projects into the background.
--
-- With Best Regards,
Matthew Funke (m...@hopper.unh.edu)
boa13
>
> Number Two is an attempt at making an interactive game
> based on X-COM 1 ("Enemy Unknown" or "UFO Defense", depending
> on where you are). It's two-thirds IF and one-third RPG. I
> haven't actually worked on it for some time.
Gasp! Would it resemble the great transcript you can read
starting down one third of this page:
http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~xcom/humour.shtml ?
X-COM... Now, that was a great game!
--
spam....@free.fr
You have my nick and my hostname: you can mail me
Matthew F Funke
>On Jeudi 20 Février 2003 18:21, Matthew F Funke wrote:
>>
>> Number Two is an attempt at making an interactive game
>> based on X-COM 1 ("Enemy Unknown" or "UFO Defense", depending
>> on where you are). It's two-thirds IF and one-third RPG. I
>> haven't actually worked on it for some time.
>
>Gasp! Would it resemble the great transcript you can read
>starting down one third of this page:
>http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~xcom/humour.shtml ?
<ROTFLSHIAKTC> Holy cyberdisk! That's *great*!
No, I'm afraid that my engine was a much more traditional text RPG.
The IF parts happened back at Excelsior Base (at the North Pole) or at
Nadir Base (in Antarctica). I put much more effort into trying to creep
out the player with these little snippets at the bases than trying to
realistically model the combat. I wish I *had* done the combat more like
traditional IF now. :)
>X-COM... Now, that was a great game!
Seconded. I've always wondered what X-COM would look like *now* if
they were able to use modern graphics (make it sharper, but don't change
*too* much), modern music (must still be creepy), and modern memory/
computing power (make buildings in cities higher than three stories).
I'd be scared to death of killing the feel of the game, though.
Jaap van der Velde
>Not really a case of prisoner's dilemma, IMHO. In the prisoner's
>dilemma, A's choosing to co-operate would have no effect on B's choice
>since choices are independant. In fact, if B knew in advance that A was
>going to co-operate, it would clearly be to B's advantage *not* to
>co-operate (i.e., to squeal on A). That gets B the maximum benefit; the
>Prisoner's Dilemma situation is one of competition.
B doesn't know what A chooses, but B -does- know what A's options
are.
We may even need to take this discussion to talk.philosophy.misc.
Classic prisoner's dilemma: A and B faced with a choice between
2 options. The conditions are the same for both:
Either you choose X or Y. If you choose X and the other chooses Y,
you gain nothing. If you both choose X, you gain some. If you choose
Y and the other chooses X, you gain a lot. If you both choose Y,
you both gain some, but less than when you both would've chosen X.
(an excellent and more detailed treatment is here:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/prisoner-dilemma/#Sym)
Essential in Prisoner's dilemma is the fact that for each player,
it seems more profitable to choose Y (gain a lot or some) than to
choose X (gain more or nothing). (a lot > more > some > nothing)
But if both choose X, they are better off than when they both
choose Y. (instead of X you can read 'cooperate' and instead of
Y 'defect', to get the canonical problem)
In our discussion, every individual developer seems to be better
off when not cooperating. (no loss if no one else does, and no
costs when others do cooperate) But if all cooperate, they are all
better off than when none cooperate. (at least, that is our view)
>In development of open-source software (note that I'm specifically
>considering only open-source development here), OTOH, maximum benefit is
>gained from co-operation, not competition. Editor A and IDE B are both
>without a good integration API; but once one adds said API, the other
>will derive maximum benefit from doing the same. There's still a
>question of "Who will go first?" as the person going first will do more
>work than the people going later, but everyone derives benefit from
>adding the API eventually.
So, I think the problem here is not "who will go first?" (implying
others will follow) but "If I go first, will anyone/some follow?".
This usually requires some big players to announce they will support
a standard. This gets the ball rolling, as the first developers now
at least have some confidence in others following.
Finally, to take the discussion back into the fold of this group:
in IF, there are no 'big players' who can assure the pioneers that
they will follow in a new standard. An IF tool developer does so
in his own time and if anyone wants to use his work: great. For
IF, it would be great if a standard IDE-to-editor interface
existed, because this would mean writing an IF IDE would no longer
have to involve writing a decent editor. But as there is no such
standard (yet), an IF IDE developed right now would either have to
include an editor or set the standard for editor-IDE communication.
I think we agree the latter is unlikely. The former is the situation
we were discussing, but whether you like it or not, I think that
-for now- it is a necessary evil to include an editor in an IF-IDE.
(or is it? see discussions on IF# and Inform.net)
Grtz,
JAAP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If a `religion' is defined to be a system of ideas that contains
unprovable statements, then Godel taught us that mathematics is not only
a religion, it is the only religion that can prove itself to be one."
-- John Barrow
Susan Davis
> ... and why didn't you finish them?
Most of them are all related to the first two: my own IF authoring
system and library. Originally, it started as a set of extensions to
ADVSYS, with a view toward creating an ADVSYS 2.0 that would have had
similar functionality to TADS and the Infocom canon. Eventually, I
intended to have the thing produce Z-code, but this was before there
was Inform, so that was more of a "maybe someday" feature. After
Inform came out, and I discovered Scheme, the project turned into
"Zcheme," an attempt at writing a Z-machine Scheme dialect that would
be small enough to leave enough room for non-trivial games. The idea
was that Zcheme code would also work in Kawa, which would give authors
a clear upgrade path from the Z-machine to the JVM and therefore
arbitrarily large games. Some interesting hacking resulted, but no
actually usuable system as of yet, and I've decided to get out of the
business of hacking IF tools in favor of writing actual games.
The real time sink was my "newstd" library for ADVSYS 1.x. It turned
out that many of the features that I wanted were doable in library code,
so I've spent quite a bit of time hacking ADVSYS library code over the
years. I started with "standard.adi" from the folks who did "elves87",
and wandered rather far away. I'll probably clean out a few remaining
bugs from the library at some point, and drop it on ifarchive.
The test program for the library was a port of Colossal Cave. My test
for the readiness of WIP #2 to be released is full playability of this
port; it needs at least a few more weekends of work and some testing,
but I'm working on this year's competition entry instead.
WIP #4 is my huge "King Lear in space" five part epic, intended to wind
up as some relatively large number of .z5 files: one Act I, three Act
II's, a bunch of Act III's, a smaller number of Act IV's, and two or
three Act V's. I have the overall structure down, and a detailed design
of how the first two acts shake out. I need to cut down the number of
characters a little, and solidify my list of flashbacks for Act I, but
I'm pretty confident of being able to get an Act I out at some point.
I've been poking at this since before the first Inform release, though;
which would make this the Avalon of Avalons....
WIP #5, "Babylon," was an idea for a minicomp a few years back that
involved the reading of a will. It's similar enough to Act I of
"Nikolai Grozhny" (WIP #4) that it may never see the light of day,
or I may toss it out as a prototype or a competition entry some year.
WIP #6, "Peace Is Our Profession," is on hold, but might surface for
a minicomp or the like. It's inherently time-limited, and is a very
small and tight character study. I need some extremely solid NPC code
to implement it, though, and a little more thought. Maybe some year.
WIP #7 is this year's competition entry, and I spent most of today
doing research and design for it. The major remaining decision,
design-wise, is whether to go with Platypus or Onyx Ring as my
development library. I'm trying to resist the temptation to start a
WIP #8, my own hacked-up version of Platypus, which would involve
porting some greatly desired functionality from WIP #2 to Inform for
use in implementing WIP #7....
--
Susan Davis <s...@sue.net>
Gadget
<gad...@SPAMBLOCKhaha.demon.nl> wrote:
>... and why didn't you finish them?
>
I think I'll also answer my own question, since so many of you took
the time to do so...
Currently I have 4 WIPs on my hd.
1) Reality's End
My entry for introcomp. I'm about halfway through coding the intro,
but there is still lots to do...
2) Dutch Dapper V
I decided to do a proper sequel to DDIV, and so far I just have a
synopsis and a few hand-written transcripts of puzzles.
3) Aya's Quest, side-story to Dutch Dapper IV.
No coding yet, but some ideas and a small map.
4) The Land
A classic style treasure-hunt. I have some locations and objects and
drew a huge map of The Land which I probably won't be able to
implement completely :-(
I work on this whenever I am stuck on Reality's End, to get my
creative juices flowing again.
-------------
It's a bird...
It's a plane...
No, it's... Gadget?
-------------------
To send mail remove SPAMBLOCK from address.
LoneCleric
"In the Blood" is my entry in Jason Dyer's "IF Marathon"
(http://members.aol.com/jdyer41/marathon.html). Sure, I'm running a bit
late, since the whole thing was supposed to take 48 hours to make and it
was due last June 2nd, but things are, hrm, progressing.
Interestingly enough, ItB is sort of a prequel for "A Silken Shawl and a
Broken Dream", my entry in Storme Winfield's RomanceNovel Comp
(http://brasslantern.org/reviews/text/rncomp02.html). Sure, this one is
374 days late and counting, but I'm getting there. No, really.
LC
Gadget wrote:
> ... and why didn't you finish them?
>
> Curious as always,
> Harry
>
>
>
> -------------
> It's a bird...
> It's a plane...
> No, it's... Gadget?
> -------------------
> To send mail remove SPAMBLOCK from adress.
Jon Ingold
> > PULL THE LEFT ROPE
then with three loops...
and PULL THE MIDDLE LEFT ROPE
and PULL THE FAR LEFT ROPE
then five loops...
PULL THE MIDDLE ROPE
PULL THE LEFT MIDDLE ROPE
PULL THE FAR RIGHT ROPE
...and then there's assigning which is which anyway in any meaningful
sense...
Jon
Joe Mason
PULL THE OTHER ONE
Joe
Jon Ingold
> >
> > PULL THE MIDDLE ROPE
> > PULL THE LEFT MIDDLE ROPE
> > PULL THE FAR RIGHT ROPE
> >
> > ...and then there's assigning which is which anyway in any meaningful
> > sense...
>
> PULL THE OTHER ONE
Dong.
Jon
Robin Munn
> others will follow) but "If I go first, will anyone/some follow?".
> This usually requires some big players to announce they will support
> a standard. This gets the ball rolling, as the first developers now
> at least have some confidence in others following.
>
> Finally, to take the discussion back into the fold of this group:
> in IF, there are no 'big players' who can assure the pioneers that
> they will follow in a new standard. An IF tool developer does so
> in his own time and if anyone wants to use his work: great. For
> IF, it would be great if a standard IDE-to-editor interface
> existed, because this would mean writing an IF IDE would no longer
> have to involve writing a decent editor. But as there is no such
> standard (yet), an IF IDE developed right now would either have to
> include an editor or set the standard for editor-IDE communication.
>
> I think we agree the latter is unlikely. The former is the situation
> we were discussing, but whether you like it or not, I think that
> -for now- it is a necessary evil to include an editor in an IF-IDE.
>
> (or is it? see discussions on IF# and Inform.net)
I think we're in complete agreement, both with the current necessity of
including an editor in an IF IDE (indeed, just about any IDE) and also
the desirability of a more general-purpose, standards-based integration
solution.
John Bichard
>> computer in an Inform game on which you can play the game itself.
>> (You can't play the game in the game of this game, however).
> When can we see the source code?
When I've found it.
John Bichard
Daniel Barkalow
at writing scenes and terrible at coming up with plot arcs, so I come up
with an interesting idea with a scene, and then can't figure out the rest
of what happens in the game. I'm hoping that someday, I'll have enough of
these that I'll suddenly realize a way that enough of them can be strung
together to produce a game. In practice, I end up with a lot of code
fragments that do interesting things. I suspect this is the fate of
non-writer programmers who try to take up IF.
I have written a game once, but it's actually shorter than any of the
scenes I've written, and entirely silly.
Of course, now that I think of it, I have written one short story, which
would actually be ideal for IF, aside from that fact that it is almost
exclusively interaction with an NPC and involves the PC going through
quite a lot of trouble to lose the game.
-Iabervon
*This .sig unintentionally changed*
Mark J. Tilford
> ... and why didn't you finish them?
>
> Curious as always,
> Harry
>
Just one, jAsea, a clone of the ADRIFT runner. It's making ever so slow
progress due to a lack of information on the format, and a lack of
feedback from users.
(For anybody interested, source and binaries are available at
http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/jasea )
--
------------------------
Mark Jeffrey Tilford
til...@ugcs.caltech.edu
Marnie Parker
>From: "Mark J. Tilford" til...@ugcs.caltech.edu
>Date: 2/28/2003 2:35 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id:
>On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 20:53:16 +0100, Gadget <gad...@SPAMBLOCKhaha.demon.nl>
>wrote:
>> ... and why didn't you finish them?
>>
>> Curious as always,
>> Harry
>>
Let's see, at last count, I have eight. Ranging from mystery to sci-fi to
fantasy to reality-based. One is was already released, but needs a rewritten
ending. One is about 75-89% done, another is about 1/2 done, and another is
about a 1/3 done. And I also have some ideas, pretty fully-fleshed, that I've
always meant to pursue.
Why aren't they finished? Who's got the time? Seriously, who does? Also, why
bother? A lot of work for very, very little feedback and/or little or no
reward.
Or maybe I find writing IF games more difficult and time consuming than some
others do. I don't know. I have never figured that out.
Maybe someday, when I have the time. Or maybe not. Who knows? I certainly
don't.
Doe ;-)
doea...@aol.com
IF http://members.aol.com/doepage/intfict.htm
(An Iffy Theory | Glulx/Glk for Duncies | unglklib | Inform Primer)
IF Art Gallery http://members.aol.com/iffyart/
IF Review Conspiracy http://zork.plover.net/~textfire/conspiracy/