2.x vs 3.x

[Tamamo]

It would be nice, but in reality, it means holding off making anything new, or useful, for two years, or more. There's no reason that changes can't be reintegrated, if the changes are logged. In fact, most of what I've been doing should be reusable as-is, either way.

It cames down to:

1. New functions, tied into the ZScript bytecode tables.
1a. Drawing related.
1b. System-environment related.
2. Bison/Flex improvements and expansions.
3. Class object->Property additions.

By the time we get 'round to doing some of the things on the list, if there's a cleaner basecode, we'd use that, but there's no valid reason to put what we're doing on hiatus for an indefinite duration, nor does any one of us want to sit down and rewrite all of the enemy, or Link, collision, or weapon handling at present.

Yeah I can understand that. It's a pain in the ass to work with. >_>

FFC improvements, as I mentioned, should in theory be a drop-in replacement for either branch.

My thoughts exactly.

In fact, in the process of expanding various components, it is possible that they'll be cleaned up. I'd like to make the process of adding ZScript instructions clearer, too.

Definitely needs to be made clearer. I refuse to touch that stuff.

You also need to keep in mind that the rewrites might fail. There is no way to determine how long it will take for a 3.x rewrite to be stable, at all, if ever. I was around for the 2.11/2.5 rewrite. It was a period of eight years of darkness, and I eventually gave up feeling that it was vapourware.

Yeah it's sad but true. It's going to be a long tunnel, but it's sure in hell gonna be worth it.

A fair amount of what I'm doing, is finishing features that were planned, or intended for 2.5, and left unfinished.

This is also my one of my goals as well. So I agree that this stuff needs to be done. Have you taken a look at my Mirror Shielded Enemies code yet?

You also need to pay attention to the general lethargy in the userbase. We really have had little to no influx of new users, since 2.50 was released. New releases, even if imperfect, revitalise the community, by drawing interest of new users, and by reigniting interest of present users; as they try to top one-another in 'showing off' what they can do with the new/updated widgets.

Speaking of widgets; Saffith, at least I think it was him anyways, has been replacing the allegro GUI with GTK. Now isn't that fancy, Now quest rules have tabs!

I'm watching every day as users fade out, and no-one replaces them; the general activity tapers off, and interest wanes. In two or three years, with nothing new or exciting to offer, there won't be anyone left to use or appreciate a cleaner codebase. People want features to compete with other tools, and without them, they'll just use other software. Once that happens, good luck getting them back.

I agree with you there, more of the reason we need somebody willing to call you all to a round table and have a cup coffee and talk things over.

Oh no, I never said you were the only one. I'm just hoping that there won't be any biases or such.

Hahaha, I do not discriminate don't worry I treat everyone fairly. I work with ZoriaRPG more then you think.
Speaking of which @ZoriaRPG I'm planning on rewriting weapons next month to make it less of a mess. I'm going to add inheritance. In otherwards their will now be a class for each weapon type. Their might be some Parser changes so I'll get together with you on that later on.

Anyways, I think a rewrite would be the best thing so far, if only because it would allow us to get out of the mess that 2.5 is. However, I think we should keep most of the things 2.5 has, like ZScript. If we were to remove ZScript, that could turn off plenty of people.

Again, though, 2.5 would make a new update faster, without turning off anybody. I think that cleaning up 2.5 would be a rather nice goal.

We will cross the bridge of removing ZScript when we get their. Most likely it isn't gonna happen. In fact I would be against it.