Re: CF: the map-editor

[peter@toneby.ml.org]

On Tue, Dec 01, 1998 at 07:47:16PM -0800, Mark Wedel wrote:
> On Dec 2,  3:33am, peter@toneby.ml.org wrote:
> > Subject: CF: the map-editor
> > I finally got the map-editor to compile (I don't know what was wrong
> > earlier, probably the maps...), anyway, are there any work currently to
> > redo it into GTK? otherwise I would like to try to do it as a way to
> > learn GTK.
> 
>  David Sundqvist has expressed interest to me in redoing the editor in GTK
> also.   Redo in this case means a rewrite from the ground up.
Well, that was what I was thinking about to, excpet for those pieces
that I can rob from the client ;), some drawing and such...
But David is of course allowed to come with suggestions and advise.
I will probably set up a CVS-repository for this (mostly for my own
use...), so I can add people interrested in the code to have access to
it. I am going to try to make som mockups of the editor I envision so
peple can comment on it.
> 
> > But since Mark is about to do some major changes to the internals of the
> > server, I would like to know if there are any changes to the map-code
> > that are planned, if so I would like to know what so I can make som
> > assumptions about how to code the editor.
> 
>  The major change I tend to make to the internals is how objects are
> represented - instead of one global object structure with different meanings of
> some of the fields, break it down into several unique object types with clear
> cut meanings (exp will always mean experience, and not bonus speed like it does
> for rings right now.)
It would be good to know what to call the fields... But that isn't very
important right now, maybe when I have gotten the drawing bits and
pieces together we could settle some kind of standard.

> 
>  I'll probably collapse the 100 or so object types into less than 10, with the
> rest either being subtypes or actual data in the specific item that determines
> its properties.
> 
quite a bit more efficient, but even if the server isn't very much of a
mem-hog this will make  it much less, along with more efficient (i
really hope).

>  For example, a quick list of the master item types:
> 
>  monsterss
>  players
>  weapons
>  equipment (rings, armor, shields, helms, boots, ...)
>  spell casting items (rods, wands, staves, horns, scrolls,potions, balms)
>  and a few more I am sure.
> 
hmmm, this list gave  me an idea ;), you'll se it in the mockup...

[snip of good explantion of large changes]

> most items, the num_worn would be 1, but for rings it would be 2 (it could be
> argued to make it 8 - one per finger, but that has many play balance
> implications) 
I'm in fully on that one, I don't think it would be good to have 8
rings,  or more than one thing around your neck (not counting things
like the talisman), but we could add bracelets, or some such, that of
course are rare, but are slightly bettter than average rings.

[snip of roundup]
> 
>  Back to the point of the editor - the above changes will certainly mean that
> handling of objects will change a bit, so I would hold off on writing object
> editing.  However, the basics of the layout and even map interaction is
> unlikely to change (insert_ob_in_map is likely to remain unchanged, as are most
> all map related functions I would think).  So a lot of the code can be done
> without worry of it becoming nonusuable because the backend function have
> changed.
OKI, I'll have to start with the "drawing" first anyway, so you'll have
some more time before I bug you about it again ;).
> 
> -- 
> 
> -- Mark Wedel
> mark@pyramid.com
-
[you can put yourself on the announcement list only or unsubscribe altogether
by sending an email stating your wishes to crossfire-request@ifi.uio.no]