Gargoyle integration under review for ScummVM

[Paul Gilbert]

Hi all,

Just dropping a note that my development of a Gargoyle engine module for ScummVM is now under official review for integration into the main project: https://github.com/scummvm/scummvm/pull/1386

At the moment, it implements the bulk of the GLK interface, and implements ScottFree as a proof of concept sub-engine under it. One of the initial reviewers raised the question of whether it would cause any confusion with the existing stand-alone Gargoyle having the engine within ScummVM named Gargoyle as well. I'm inclined to not think so, since the engine names aren't exactly in the face of end users, but figured it wouldn't hurt to check. Maybe the engine could even be renamed as glk if that would be considered better?

Regards,

DreamMaster.

[be...@beuc.net]

Hi,

On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 10:00:30AM -0800, Paul Gilbert wrote:
> Just dropping a note that my development of a Gargoyle engine module for
> ScummVM is now under official review for integration into the main
> project: https://github.com/scummvm/scummvm/pull/1386

Congrats!

> At the moment, it implements the bulk of the GLK interface, and implements
> ScottFree as a proof of concept sub-engine under it. One of the initial
> reviewers raised the question of whether it would cause any confusion with
> the existing stand-alone Gargoyle having the engine within ScummVM named
> Gargoyle as well. I'm inclined to not think so, since the engine names
> aren't exactly in the face of end users, but figured it wouldn't hurt to
> check. Maybe the engine could even be renamed as glk if that would be
> considered better?

"Glk" alone is the name of the API:
https://www.eblong.com/zarf/glk/
So no.

ScummGlk maybe :)

- Sylvain

[Andrew Plotkin]

If this is a new implementation of the Glk interface (distinct from
GarGlk), then yes, ScummGlk is a reasonable name. Then it has
various IF VM cores attached, but those can keep their usual names.

(This is a familiar confusion: to Scumm users, this is a Glk module, but
to Glk users, it's a Scumm module. :) Agglutinating the names doesn't
always work, but this should be okay.)

--Z

--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*

[Paul Gilbert]

On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 07:35:57 UTC-8, Andrew Plotkin wrote:

If this is a new implementation of the Glk interface (distinct from
GarGlk), then yes, ScummGlk is a reasonable name. Then it has
various IF VM cores attached, but those can keep their usual names.

(This is a familiar confusion: to Scumm users, this is a Glk module, but
to Glk users, it's a Scumm module. :) Agglutinating the names doesn't
always work, but this should be okay.)

 

Good idea. I like the symmetry of it. :) And luckily, since it hasn't landed in master yet, I can still do a rebase to change the engine name in the historical commits.