Difference between revisions of "Talk:Mission Scripting (Overview)"
(→SCM Highlightning) |
(→Tools: new section) |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
This would look realy better, I think. --[[User:Aschratt|Aschratt]] 12:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC) | This would look realy better, I think. --[[User:Aschratt|Aschratt]] 12:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
:Both fixed. --[[User:Steve-m|Steve-m]] 17:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC) | :Both fixed. --[[User:Steve-m|Steve-m]] 17:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Tools == | ||
| + | |||
| + | We should move the information from the [[Mission_Scripting_(Overview)#The_Tools|Tools section]] into the articles describing each of them and leave only a link to the [[Mission Scripting Tools]] [[User:Seemann|Seemann]] 06:24, 20 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 06:24, 20 February 2009
Jernej, why not correct/remove/extend odd phrases instead of making stupid comments? --steve-m 14:52, 17 Feb 2007 (CST)
Rewrite
The Tools section is old and incomplete. Cracking the SCM is based on the Mission Builder syntax which is obsolete. And this article says nothing about variables, labels, threads, external scripts. As this article is a Top 10 popular page, I believe it should be cleaned and improved. Seemann 02:19, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
SCM Highlightning
Hey,
there's one thing I'd like to add to the SCM highlightning. Look at this:
:MYTHREAD01
0001: wait 1 ms
0002: jump @MYTHREAD01Now the label descriptions (@...) should be green, too, don't you think so? Also can we somehow create a backround box
like in this text?
This would look realy better, I think. --Aschratt 12:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- Both fixed. --Steve-m 17:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Tools
We should move the information from the Tools section into the articles describing each of them and leave only a link to the Mission Scripting Tools Seemann 06:24, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
