Newbie Question - Infix under Glulx
BruceH
yet been able to find out what Glulx uses instead of Infix (which
according to the documentation I _have_ been able to find, and
according to compiler messages, is not available under Glulx). Could
someone let me know what to use instead?
Also, my only IF experience is an Eamon from a couple of decades ago -
would an updated (deeper, with more non-default responses and with
better help for new players) version of something done that long ago,
maybe as a sequel, make a good first project?
P.S. Is the correct spelling "Glulx" or "Glulxe", or are both correct
in different contexts?
Bert Byfield
> have not yet been able to find out what Glulx uses instead of
> Infix (which according to the documentation I _have_ been able to
> find, and according to compiler messages, is not available under
> Glulx). Could someone let me know what to use instead?
Glulx does not use infix, but *you* can (and should). Plug "glulx
gull" into Google and read the Gull web pages.
> Also, my only IF experience is an Eamon from a couple of decades
> ago - would an updated (deeper, with more non-default responses
> and with better help for new players) version of something done
> that long ago, maybe as a sequel, make a good first project?
Whatever you want would make a good first project. The IF world is
rather open.
> P.S. Is the correct spelling "Glulx" or "Glulxe", or are both
> correct in different contexts?
"Glulxe" is obsolete. Use the latest Inform compiler INFORM.EXE
version 6.30 and library 6/ll, with the -G switch on. Glulx is the
part of the library that handles your sound and pictures, via
infix.h -- Gull and Firthworks both have must-read articles on these
things, and the pages are essential for that and other reasons.
Google will find them, since "glulx" is rather unique as a search
argument.
BruceH
Andrew Plotkin
> > P.S. Is the correct spelling "Glulx" or "Glulxe", or are both
> > correct in different contexts?
>
> "Glulxe" is obsolete.
No, "Glulxe" is the name of the interpreter I wrote. It's still
current.
--Z
--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
If the Bush administration hasn't subjected you to searches without a warrant,
it's for one reason: they don't feel like it. Not because you're an American.
Roger Firth
news:1144769416.1...@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I have been trying to learn Inform/Glulx for a year or so, and have not
> yet been able to find out what Glulx uses instead of Infix (which
> according to the documentation I _have_ been able to find, and
> according to compiler messages, is not available under Glulx). Could
> someone let me know what to use instead?
Unfortunately, the Infix debugger isn't available when compiling
for Glulx. This means that you're restricted to the debugging verbs
such as SHOWOBJ, GOTO, etc, provided by the -D compiler switch.
> Also, my only IF experience is an Eamon from a couple of decades ago -
> would an updated (deeper, with more non-default responses and with
> better help for new players) version of something done that long ago,
> maybe as a sequel, make a good first project?
Absolutely.
> P.S. Is the correct spelling "Glulx" or "Glulxe", or are both correct
> in different contexts?
What Andrew said: "Glulx" is the name of his 32-bit virtual machine,
and "Glulxe" (Glulx Engine, from memory) is one of the interpreters
written to support that VM (for the others, "git" and "zag", see
http://mirror.ifarchive.org/indexes/if-archiveXprogrammingXglulxXinterpreters.html).
Cheers, Roger
--
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
You'll find all my IF pages at http://www.firthworks.com/roger
WARNING: aggressive spam deletion -- use a meaningful Subject!
Bert Byfield
>>> correct in different contexts?
>> "Glulxe" is obsolete.
> No, "Glulxe" is the name of the interpreter I wrote. It's still
> current. --Z
Yes, it still works, but if you want the latest INFORM features of
6.30 you must use the INFORM.EXE compiler.
Andrew Plotkin
> >>> correct in different contexts?
>
> >> "Glulxe" is obsolete.
>
> > No, "Glulxe" is the name of the interpreter I wrote. It's still
> > current.
>
> 6.30 you must use the INFORM.EXE compiler.
You are mishearing me. I'm not talking about the compiler. The
compiler is called Inform. The obsolete compiler, which I think you're
talking about, was called "informg" or "informbp", depending on which
you were using.
Glulxe is the name of an interpreter -- the one I wrote -- and it is
up to date.
Bert Byfield
> You are mishearing me. I'm not talking about the compiler. The
> compiler is called Inform. The obsolete compiler, which I think
> you're talking about, was called "informg" or "informbp",
> depending on which you were using.
> Glulxe is the name of an interpreter -- the one I wrote -- and it
> is up to date. --Z
Oh, yes! Never mind! ;-)
Eric Forgeot
> I have been trying to learn Inform/Glulx for a year or so, and have not
> yet been able to find out what Glulx uses instead of Infix (which
> according to the documentation I _have_ been able to find, and
> according to compiler messages, is not available under Glulx). Could
> someone let me know what to use instead?
>
as an alternative to the solutions already given, you can also make your
game so it can compile for zmachine (z5 ou z8), use the infix functions
there, and compile for glulx once your game is finished.
BruceH
while, but with a half-meg of text to include (in addition to several
dozen K of room descriptions) Glulx will soon be necessary. It's faster
to actually include excerpts from reference books, in those cases where
I could find public-domain versions, than to dummy up fake books that
look halfway decent (the grimoire is only a few pages long, but took
days and days and still isn't finished).