[ian-reeds-games] Re: Callbacks
- From: Zak Claassen <zak.claassen@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: ian-reeds-games@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 00:51:54 +0200
I was wondering how you were going to tackle that particular part of
command and conquer. Thought you would just leave it out, but clearly
I underestimated you. This could be pretty useful.
I know next to nothing about programming but the syntax example you
gave makes perfect sense to me, and I'm sure it'll work just fine the
way you have it now. Of course I'm not very creative so if there's a
way to improve it I wouldn't be the one to think of it.
On 4/21/13, Craig Brett <craigbrett17@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm thinking of introducing a new optional concept into some of my
> scripts, something called callbacks. Essentially, this means that you
> can call a script after another script automagically.
>
> My original use case is that I want to use change_unit_type on my
> Command and Conquer IFVs whenever an infantry enters them, to change it
> into a new type of IFV depending on the infantry that just got in. To
> do that... well... I had no idea how else to do it to be honest. But I
> can imagine it would be useful, my worry is that it will be a more
> complex trick in the script user's book.
>
> I've got it working here, but I'm not sure if the syntax will be
> agreeable to everyone.
>
> So currently, I have an extra OnEnter argument to the
> add_transport_capabilities, which takes the name of the script I want
> to call (note that it isn't in double quotationmarks). I also have an
> OnEnterArgs argument, which takes the arguments for the callback script
> (or script to run afterwards) inside of curly braces. At the minute,
> {0} inside the OnEnterArgs refers to the user of the skill's type, {1}
> refers to the target of the skill's type.
>
> This might be a little easier to understand with an example, so here's
> my current working example.
>
> after_create=add_transport_capabilities@ { Capacity: 1, OnEnter:
> change_unit_type, OnEnterArgs: { NewType: "{0} ifv" } }
>
> So this would allow a unit to board the IFV and once they're aboard, it
> will turn into a {0} ifv. So if it's a peacekeeper, it will become a
> peacekeeper ifv, a javalin soldier will turn it into a javalin soldier
> ifv, etc.
>
> This is just an idea for tackling this problem I'm knocking about. I
> can understand it's slightly more complicated to write, which is why
> I'm interested in hearing opinions. I also am open to suggestions on
> the {0} and {1} inside of OnEnterArgs, whether it should be restricted
> to the Type and if not, how would you like it to look? It could
> possibly look like {0}.Type, but that does add extra complications for
> people writing it.
>
> I want to make this as open as possible, so that it's useful to more
> people in more scenarios. But the more generic I make this, the more
> complicated it might look.
>
> Does anybody have any thoughts? Constructive criticism? Better
> alternatives?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Craig
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
