The following warnings occurred:
Warning [2] Use of undefined constant SAPI_NAME - assumed 'SAPI_NAME' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) - Line: 3388 - File: inc/functions.php PHP 7.4.33-nmm6 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/functions.php 3388 errorHandler->error
/showthread.php 116 build_archive_link
Warning [2] Use of undefined constant IN_ARCHIVE - assumed 'IN_ARCHIVE' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) - Line: 3331 - File: inc/functions.php PHP 7.4.33-nmm6 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/functions.php 3331 errorHandler->error
/inc/functions.php 3324 build_forum_breadcrumb
/showthread.php 195 build_forum_breadcrumb
Warning [2] Use of undefined constant IN_ARCHIVE - assumed 'IN_ARCHIVE' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) - Line: 3331 - File: inc/functions.php PHP 7.4.33-nmm6 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/functions.php 3331 errorHandler->error
/showthread.php 195 build_forum_breadcrumb






Poll: Which would you rather see for the Definition Naming in sphere base packs?
i_large_battle_axe
i_lg_battle_axe
i_axe_large_battle
i_axe_battle_lg
i_axe_battle_large
i_battle_axe_lg
i_battle_axe_large
[Show Results]
 
Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING
Author Message
Khaos
Master
**

Posts: 595
Likes Given: 166
Likes Received: 83 in 51 posts
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 11



Post: #12
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING
Yes and no. The naming for stuff like that is fine to place _verite at the end; as it is not the BASE item. The BASE item should be strictly named. As I showed you before; I strict name and then do the addon's after. Again it comes into the way the polls setup right now. there is too many variants used. Then we get to cleaver... i_cleaver. Then i_cleaver_war? Yet what if I want i_cleaver to have a war version? Simply slapping i_sword in front of cleaver_war goes against the naming conventions. This is where I will never agree with you and others. war cleaver (war is not the descriptor). It is a War Cleaver. that is the BASEITEM name. What you add in the suffix to it in the definition is customized.

We don't have i_armor_leather in the basepacks since ever. We have always had i_leather_armor. So why is it you all make this exception with strict naming, but not with weapons, items, and NPCs? Armor is top of the class and get special privileges? I don't think so in my opinion.

Yet, with the above i_leather_armor example; this is all through sphere since pre 55i times. Some items get strict naming while others get what you all want. Mind you, only 5 of us think it should be STRICT (including me and another developer whom is a programmer as well). there is a reason for this. If I think I want a large battle axe... it is just as easy to add i_large_battle_axe. I know that is the name so the def should be the same. Now I want a war cleaver: i_war_cleaver Oh god it wont add. Lets try i_cleaver_war... darn it won't add. i_sword_war_cleaver?! But it is not called Sword War Cleaver or War Cleaver Sword.

This is what I am getting at. You all talk inheritance; but there isn't a single piece of logical inheritance with the war cleaver.. or elven machete... or any of those new weapons. STRICT naming makes more sense.

I will know in my custom scripts that i_war_cleaver that is verite will have verite suffixed. Because that is customary to suffix customization's to the baseitem. No matter how you slice; you aren't sticking true with what you are saying if you are slapping SWORD in front of war cleaver... or even adding MEAT to a normal cleaver... it is not called a meat clever.
(This post was last modified: 12-01-2013 08:47 PM by Khaos.)
12-01-2013 08:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - Khaos - 11-30-2013, 08:33 PM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - karma - 11-30-2013, 09:52 PM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - Crusader - 11-30-2013, 10:21 PM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - Mulambo - 11-30-2013, 10:51 PM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - Mordaunt - 11-30-2013, 11:12 PM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - RanXerox - 12-01-2013, 04:42 AM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - karma - 12-01-2013, 08:23 AM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - Khaos - 12-01-2013, 10:56 AM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - Khaos - 12-01-2013, 05:37 PM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - XuN - 12-01-2013, 08:02 PM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - Khaos - 12-01-2013 08:42 PM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - Extreme - 12-01-2013, 09:46 PM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - XuN - 12-02-2013, 12:07 AM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - Khaos - 12-02-2013, 12:30 AM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - Extreme - 12-02-2013, 06:26 AM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - Khaos - 12-02-2013, 07:11 AM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - XuN - 12-02-2013, 07:32 AM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - Extreme - 12-02-2013, 08:51 AM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - babazar - 12-04-2013, 10:59 PM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - Khaos - 12-05-2013, 02:13 AM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - karma - 12-06-2013, 02:39 AM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - ShiryuX - 12-09-2013, 09:59 AM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - Wap - 12-09-2013, 11:10 AM
RE: BASE PACK DEFINITION NAMING - Khaos - 12-09-2013, 11:13 AM

Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)