Difference between revisions of "Category talk:OpCodes"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
It is very important to include all the info about opcodes we have to the wiki. But should there be more unified way of naming the separate pages? I suggest to use the titles like title=opcode_0000, title=opcode_0001 and so forth. | It is very important to include all the info about opcodes we have to the wiki. But should there be more unified way of naming the separate pages? I suggest to use the titles like title=opcode_0000, title=opcode_0001 and so forth. | ||
| − | You're right, Seemann, that's the only way to go, as there isn't (and will never be) an official naming convention for opcodes. | + | :You're right, Seemann, that's the only way to go, as there isn't (and will never be) an official naming convention for opcodes. |
Additionally, we have to establish a blueprint for the general design of an Opcode Description page - which syntaxes to include, explanation of parameters and so on. | Additionally, we have to establish a blueprint for the general design of an Opcode Description page - which syntaxes to include, explanation of parameters and so on. | ||
But personally, I fear that this domain will never be used for modding reference. Most opcodes can still be found at xx-db.webtools4you.net, a 'proper' database, so I don't see the urgent need for listing them here. Not every kind of content is appropriate for being wikied. | But personally, I fear that this domain will never be used for modding reference. Most opcodes can still be found at xx-db.webtools4you.net, a 'proper' database, so I don't see the urgent need for listing them here. Not every kind of content is appropriate for being wikied. | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:oh, sorry, forgot about signing. as for the db vs. wiki, that db never gives to us such possibilities that wiki can (cross-reference links, examples, categories and such). So we MUST expand this part of wiki as it possible. And I see that the db is full of spam last days, hope the wiki can avoid that. [[User:Seemann|Seemann]] 10:58, 15 Apr 2007 (CDT) | :oh, sorry, forgot about signing. as for the db vs. wiki, that db never gives to us such possibilities that wiki can (cross-reference links, examples, categories and such). So we MUST expand this part of wiki as it possible. And I see that the db is full of spam last days, hope the wiki can avoid that. [[User:Seemann|Seemann]] 10:58, 15 Apr 2007 (CDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :OK, so let's try it here. The first task would be defining the actual layout for such a description page. When I look at the few opcodes that have already been added, I see no conformity at all - not even speaking of contributions that denote 'Hammer83' as 'Hammer32'! | ||
| + | Let's begin it! | ||
Revision as of 18:43, 15 April 2007
It is very important to include all the info about opcodes we have to the wiki. But should there be more unified way of naming the separate pages? I suggest to use the titles like title=opcode_0000, title=opcode_0001 and so forth.
- You're right, Seemann, that's the only way to go, as there isn't (and will never be) an official naming convention for opcodes.
Additionally, we have to establish a blueprint for the general design of an Opcode Description page - which syntaxes to include, explanation of parameters and so on. But personally, I fear that this domain will never be used for modding reference. Most opcodes can still be found at xx-db.webtools4you.net, a 'proper' database, so I don't see the urgent need for listing them here. Not every kind of content is appropriate for being wikied. We would rather need a more general approach to mission coding, especially with the beginners in mind, describing 'best practices' (use of waits/player_defined checks), delivering a proper introduction and tutorial - possibly with extensive examples, so that it gets as easy as possible to produce some working code. SteaVor 06:45, 15 Apr 2007 (CDT)
- oh, sorry, forgot about signing. as for the db vs. wiki, that db never gives to us such possibilities that wiki can (cross-reference links, examples, categories and such). So we MUST expand this part of wiki as it possible. And I see that the db is full of spam last days, hope the wiki can avoid that. Seemann 10:58, 15 Apr 2007 (CDT)
- OK, so let's try it here. The first task would be defining the actual layout for such a description page. When I look at the few opcodes that have already been added, I see no conformity at all - not even speaking of contributions that denote 'Hammer83' as 'Hammer32'!
Let's begin it!
