K.L.Lo-94 at student.lut.ac.uk
Mon May 12 07:32:54 New Zealand Standard Time 1997
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Dan Root wrote:
> The other two code bases I was primarily interested in (UnterMUD and
> UberMUD) were quite small as well, with most of the features I wanted,
> but with quirky coding (MJR's code is beautiful... if you can
> understand it) that made modifaction hard.
Even more code bases I've not heard of, and I thought I knew most of the
> > I may as well drop in my extremely vague aims:
> > Attachment of code to any object.
> I'm still mixed on how this will work. Part of me wants all programs
> to be 'special' and live in their own little space. Part of me wants
> the model of attaching code to objects, and the rest of me wants
> *everything* to be coded functions. (For example, my description can
> be a function that just returns a string, or actually does a bunch of
> work and returns the string based on calculation and lookups).
When I said attachment of code, I meant overriding certain defaults as
well if required. I'm from the LP background and overriding functions is
second nature to me. Just steal the best from both worlds. If I
had to categorise my mud, it would be diku grown up (I've have no
experience of a diku though).
> > Disk based.
> Definitely. My initial code does everything from disk, no objects are
> kept in memory for more than a single 'cycle' of the server.
> Eventually I'll add some more intelligent caching, but my machine has
> lots of memory which makes for a wonderful buffer cache right now. :)
What's a cycle? When I mean disk based, I was thinking along the lines of
how present LPs work, load in object, hang around in memory until swapped
out due to lack of activity (including everyone leaving an area) or
destroyed. Basically, I don't know of another method of doing it. I
wanna keep the ability in LPs to play around objects whilst online and
crash the place. :)
| Ling "Mental slavery,
_O_O_ Freshwater fish since 1976 set my spirit free"
More information about the MUD-Dev