Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive

These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE

LSL's Future

Should LSL development be continued?

Yes, continue developing inworld LSL functionality.
31 (67.4%)

No, replace LSL with with another scripting language or with MONO.
10 (21.7%)

No, replace most scripting with outworld webserver links.
2 (4.3%)

Who cares about inworld, make all programming outworld!
3 (6.5%)

Total votes: 46
Hank Ramos
Lifetime Scripter
Join date: 15 Nov 2003
Posts: 2,328
12-14-2005 18:16
Poll will Follow...
Jillian Callahan
Rotary-winged Neko Girl
Join date: 24 Jun 2004
Posts: 3,766
12-14-2005 18:46
Mono does not exclude LSL... rather the point of Mono :)

That way we can have LSL, and all sorts of other nice languages to use. But, since your poll doesn't include that, I voted for yes, keep developing LSL
_____________________
Cristiano Midnight
Evil Snapshot Baron
Join date: 17 May 2003
Posts: 8,616
12-14-2005 22:35
What is the point of the poll, as they have already stated they are developing a new scripting engine based upon the Mono project, which is an open source version of Microsoft's .net framework. As part of doing so, they will intiially create an LSL interpreter for mono, but will also ultimately allow other supported languages, like C#. Additionally, they are in the process of exposing external functionality via web APIs. The first was launched today, which is an interface to the new mapping system. Others are forthcoming - so everything you are asking about in your poll is already under development.
_____________________
Cristiano


ANOmations - huge selection of high quality, low priced animations all $100L or less.

~SLUniverse.com~ SL's oldest and largest community site, featuring Snapzilla image sharing, forums, and much more.
blaze Spinnaker
1/2 Serious
Join date: 12 Aug 2004
Posts: 5,898
12-15-2005 03:23
Currently, they are replacing the current VM with a Mono VM.

Other projects, like replacing LSL with another scripting language or allowing any generic scripting language, are far off in the future.

I think we should keep LSL because of the nature of the problem - 1000s of interacting scripts on a single VM written by 1000s of different people.

More integration with off sim processes would be nice, possibly shell accounts on the same or a very near box (gigabit interfaces) would be cool.
_____________________
Taken from The last paragraph on pg. 16 of Cory Ondrejka's paper "Changing Realities: User Creation, Communication, and Innovation in Digital Worlds :

"User-created content takes the idea of leveraging player opinions a step further by allowing them to effectively prototype new ideas and features. Developers can then measure which new concepts most improve the products and incorporate them into the game in future patches."
Kathmandu Gilman
Fearful Symmetry Baby!
Join date: 21 May 2004
Posts: 1,418
12-15-2005 03:26
Need another choice: fap fap fap... huh?
_____________________
It may be true that the squeaky wheel gets the grease but it is also true that the squeaky wheel gets replaced at the first critical maintenance opportunity.
Hank Ramos
Lifetime Scripter
Join date: 15 Nov 2003
Posts: 2,328
12-15-2005 03:30
From: Cristiano Midnight
What is the point of the poll, as they have already stated they are developing a new scripting engine based upon the Mono project, which is an open source version of Microsoft's .net framework. As part of doing so, they will intiially create an LSL interpreter for mono, but will also ultimately allow other supported languages, like C#. Additionally, they are in the process of exposing external functionality via web APIs. The first was launched today, which is an interface to the new mapping system. Others are forthcoming - so everything you are asking about in your poll is already under development.


The point was two fold...

1. To gauge whether people like LSL as is, or whether they want other languages.
2. To gauge whether people want to program inworld or outworld.

LL's current focus seems to be providing and encouraging programming outside of SL. I'm against this, personally, for my own projects. I like to do everything inside of our Second Life world, as it should be. Why have to go outside of SL to get things done? This is supposed to be SL, not RL.

Besides, we all know that LL will "someday" add .NET to SL, but we are in the here-and-now. Havok 2? XML-RPC fully implemented? Hehe. LSL is what we got.
Sable Sunset
Prim Herder
Join date: 15 Apr 2005
Posts: 223
12-15-2005 04:12
From: Hank Ramos
The point was two fold...

1. To gauge whether people like LSL as is, or whether they want other languages.
2. To gauge whether people want to program inworld or outworld.

LL's current focus seems to be providing and encouraging programming outside of SL. I'm against this, personally, for my own projects. I like to do everything inside of our Second Life world, as it should be. Why have to go outside of SL to get things done? This is supposed to be SL, not RL.

Besides, we all know that LL will "someday" add .NET to SL, but we are in the here-and-now. Havok 2? XML-RPC fully implemented? Hehe. LSL is what we got.


Thing is.. 'someday' you'll have the option of doing any and all of these things.

Internal scripting in LSL, C# and many more via Mono & the option to link to external versions of the same scripting functionality. The point of providing and developing the external links is integration - the more they move this technology on, the more 'real-world' content can be presented within SL. Whether you choose to remain working as you are (exlusively inside SL, scripting with LSL), or expand your scope to increase the functionality open to you (C#, Java, etc scripting running on external servers and connecting data from many different platforms), will be exactly that... your choice. :)

What it means is that the choices in the poll aren't mutually exclusive - you'll be able to do as many or as few of them as required to achieve the desired results! :D
_____________________