[Opensim-dev] Two sets of LSL function implementation files.

[Charles Krinke]

Dear Lbsa:

Yes Hideously is definitely the right adjective. And, quite frankly, I am embarrased that I committed those patches in the first place. 

So, your guidance in moving this mess to a place of sanity would go a long ways to allowing me to feel comfortable applying some of these patches for the xengine in the future.

As long as I can see some progress heading in the right direction, then things get more comfortable.

Right now, its just completely embarrasing to see these LSL subroutines that I and others worked so hard over the last year to get into LSL_BuiltIn_Commands.cs duplicated and morphing in divergent directions. 

Charles


----- Original Message ----
From: Stefan Andersson <stefan at tribalmedia.se>
To: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 2:46:05 AM
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Two sets of LSL function implementation files.

 From just glancing at the code, I see no reason why we couldn't create a shared LSL scripting lib (I suggest calling it OpenSim.Scripting.LSL in accordance with our recent ambition to remove superfluous namespace levels)

This project can then hold all types (or extracted basetypes) common to both the DotNetEngine and the XEngine. These two projects are HIDEOUSLY duplicated - even the LSLTypes are, which would DEFINITIVELY go into the OpenSim.Scripting.LSL baselib.
 
Doing this would be a good start for further extraction and refactoring efforts.
 
I'd do it in the blink of an eye, If I knew somebody would catch the refactorings and validate them on both engines.

Best regards,
Stefan Andersson
Tribal Media AB
 
Join the 3d web revolution : http://tribalnet.se/
 





________________________________
 Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 19:41:33 -0700
From: cfk at pacbell.net
To: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Two sets of LSL function implementation files.

 
So, how do we evolve this mess back to sanity. At this point we have two copies of the LSL function implmentation. Some folks are patching the Common/ copy. Other folks are patching the new file.

I looked at the first 100 functions (there are 300+). Some in the Common/ are not implemented. Different ones in the new xengine fork are not implemented. Most are identical. 

I have been here before with a source code file that gets copied, renamed, then two different groups start morphing it to a different place. It just gets worse and worse.

Charles


----- Original Message ----
From: Justin Clark-Casey <jjustincc at googlemail.com>
To: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
Sent: Monday, June 9, 2008 12:49:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Two sets of LSL function implementation files.

+1 too

Yes, let's make as much code common as possible, please.


Frisby, Adam wrote:
> +1
> 
>  
> 
> If we can avoid duplication (and only splitting where the engines 
> themselves differ) I strongly agree.
> 
>  
> 
> Regards,
> 
>  
> 
> Adam
> 
>  
> 
> *From:* opensim-dev-bounces at lists.berlios.de 
> [mailto:opensim-dev-bounces at lists.berlios.de] *On Behalf Of *Charles Krinke
> *Sent:* Monday, 9 June 2008 1:43 PM
> *To:* opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> *Subject:* [Opensim-dev] Two sets of LSL function implementation files.
> 
>  
> 
> We now have two sets of the implementation of the LSL scripting 
> functions themselves.
> 
> The original one is :
> 
> OpenSim\Region\ScriptEngine\Common\LSL_BuiltIn_Commands.cs
> 
> The new one is :
> 
> OpenSim\Region\ScriptEngine\XEngine\LSL_ScriptCommands.cs
> 
> In these files are implementations that are duplicates of each other, 
> such as llSay() and dozens of the others.
> 
> Originally, the Common\ directory was defined to hold all the LSL 
> function implementation and I concur  with that decision. In fact, I put 
> all the prototypes into that file for all 300+ functions.
> 
> Now, we have added a new copy of these functions and they are beginning 
> to diverge.
> 
> I believe it is of some importance that we put common logic into our 
> already defined Common\ directory for various scriptengine 
> implemenations as we move forward.
> 
> Certainly, I am not advocating a fire-drill, but rather an evolution 
> back to our original mission. This is not to preclude any functional of 
> Xengine or dotnetengine, but rather to concentrating on resolve the 
> current duplication of code from our Common\ directory.
> 
> Charles
> 
> __________________________________________________________________
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev


-- 
justincc
Justin Clark-Casey
http://justincc.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://opensimulator.org/pipermail/opensim-dev/attachments/20080610/97d2634e/attachment-0001.html>