Re: [Xconq-hackers] A bunch of bug fixes, bug reports, and requests

[Lincoln P. <sa...@sb...>]

I meant to post this over a week ago, but I've been having electrical problems 
at home that prevented my computer from running reliably.

On Thursday 22 March 2007 08:43, Massimo Campostrini wrote:
> Some proposals:
> * adjacent-terrain-dislikes t1 t2 -> n
> * material-lost-in-movement u m -> n
> * border-blocks-connection t1 t2 -> t/f
> * capture-attack-terrain-effect u1 t -> n%
> * capture-defend-terrain-effect u2 t -> n%
> * can-be-ferried-over u2 t1 -> t/f
> * can-ferry-over u1 t1 -> t/f

I have to say: I have not been involved in development of the Xconq kernel 
itself except on a few extremely rare occasions, but I've been doing a lot of 
work lately to improve my programming skills, and I'm starting to wonder if 
having all these tables for different interactions, all of which require 
support to be written into the kernel, is a losing battle.  Perhaps what we 
need to do is come up with a much simpler but highly flexible set of rules, 
from which all of Xconq's current capabilities can be produced.

The way I envision it right now is to transform GDL into a Turing-complete, 
logic-oriented language (like Prolog or Haskell), which would essentially 
allow a game designer to write a game by specifying types and the 
relationships between them.  Ideally, higher-level functionality (such as AI 
rules) or more specialized functionality (such as the tables you describe) 
could be defined as "include" files, in much the same way that in C++, you 
can include <string> or <list> to gain access to pre-built string and linked- 
list objects, respectively.  Most importantly, this functionality could be 
defined purely in GDL, without having to modify the Xconq kernel (unless you 
wanted to optimize for certain behaviors, or something like that).

I don't have time at the moment (and I don't have a clear idea of how this 
would work on a technical level), but if I can find time in the next few 
months, I'm willing to get involved in Xconq again.


-- 
Lincoln Peters		<sa...@sb...>

It's a small world, but I wouldn't want to have to paint it.
		-- Steven Wright