do you think scripting should be easyer

Hello Mephistophelina Belvedere,

Your BIO says you started in August and you have 7 posts in the Forums.

Give it a chance.

Post a question, and you may be amazed by how quickly and how easy it is to get an answer to your questions.

You can also find something that is not too difficult to read in the University of SL's archives. Hank Ramos is one of the curators there. Look it up in the find.

Samhain:

I appreciate what you're saying, but you miss my point, probably because I was ranting it and not being especially coherent. Sorry, I needed sleep.

I'm more annoyed with Linden about this. I expect that people who know something profitable will not be so willing to spend their own time giving away that information for free. The ones who do are great, of course, but too few. Really, it's Linden's responsibility.

And why isn't that University in SL Picks? Why doesn't Linden provide that as part of the education for newbies? Why not just put whatever is in there in the docs? It's taken me since August to get this far to find out about the University.

I can only guess at the motivations from what I've read here (by which I mean, the whole forum, which I have been reading since August; I just don't post a lot).

But if I were to take a guess at why Linden doesn't have good readily-available docs, it would be that Linden is a small company and the people who write code on the team either don't have time or the talent to write the docs so non-programmers can understand them.

But fixing this problem would require hiring one person who can write well and communicate with programmers. They could even farm that work out just for this project. It really needs to be done.

Otherwise, Linden needs to provide a more obvious route to user-created tutorials. And an in-game reward to the people who create them.

I get the feeling that some of the programmers here don't want to do that because they feel that opening the scripting to people more easily will result in a higher "idiot factor". But elitism is not a good argument for keeping information obfuscated.

Although I do love this game, I also have other RL responsibilities, and the more time it takes me to find basic information like this, the less time I have to create things, and that's frustrating.

Just my opinion.

Yours,

M.

Yes it should be easier. No it should no be dumbed down. These two are not mutually exclusive.

IMHO those who say that is should not be easier are trying to preserve an advantage over newbs.

There are two areas, the language and the libraries. Both could benefit from some updating and there should not be a backward compatibility problem.

A few suggestions:

Add include file capability.

Provide functions that take and return degrees. Radians are fine for math but degrees are what people are used to, they are used for real world things.

Provide functions that take and return angular vectors instead of Quaternions. Quaternions are an internal implementation detail.

Make functions that do similar things have similar names, such as obtaining the length of a string or list.

The language uses casting, actually this is not casting but conversion, conversion functions are a better choice and less confusing.

Fix the script editor a little, having an error message that says the error is on line 43 would be useful if the editor had line numbers. Also the overall script editor need a little work.

Persistence outside of the script state and variables.

There are many other things that could be done to improve scripting without disruption current users and scripts. Let's hear them!

M.

Send me an IM in game. I'll help you out. Post questions in the forums. I can almost guarantee that in the same day you will get some kind of help. I have no doubt that you will be amazed how much you will get out of these forums, and don't overlook the script archive here. There are examples, and people talking about how the code does what it does, or discussing the things that it is not doing well sometimes.

Add these forums, the Wiki and the Linden docs, and together it is fairly readable.

The University is not in the picks because there are so many people much more interested in partying or visiting casinos. =)

I forgot to mention that I have all but abandoned the IW editor. I have started using SciTE-ez. It has a lot of good features. Download SciTE-ez here

I think once you try this you'll agree this is a bit nicer. This will do two things. You will be more apt to keep a backup copy on your PC, and the features in this editor are huge!

Check it out!

Here are a couple posts that have mentioned it (not to mention this thread we are in at the moment)..

another SciTE-ez mention is here...

another one here
(edited to correct link)

Awesome. Simply awesome. Thanks Ezhar, for this, and thanks, Samhain for reminding us that it's out there.

You're very right about keeping things difficult for noobs to learn. I'm guilty of it my self. Every scripter goes through a faze where they write horrible code that does horrible things because they don't know better or can't code better (i have a friend who has been here longer then me who lacks the ability to write high quality code).

Some people just aren't cut out for coding. And this being a world where the script quality can effect other people it's perfectly reasonable to make it restrictive.

Now i don't mind helping new scripters don't get me wrong. I will help with the logic and debugging. But where i draw the line is at writing peoples scripts for them (unless thats the idea when we start). I post on the forums but there are secrets that I just won't post (i'll hint at them).

To close, some of the people who want to do scripting only want to make weapons, tanks, and slot machines. They want money and power (the type of power that is gotten with a HQ gun in Jessie). We have plenty of them we don't need more.

By making the walls lower we won't increase the number of excellent scripters, we will just increase the number of low quality scripters and greifers.

Currently I believe there are plenty of resources for learning how to script, there is the forum, the wiki, live help, the SL universities, samples, events, script librarys. But we could always use a few more.

I disagree that everyone is not cut out to write code. A monkey can learn how to write code. It is a method of thinking, that's all.

We are not smart because we write code. But too many feel like they are special because they already know how to do it.

Now we can either make it more accessible so people might actually learn how to do it, or we can continue fooling ourselves that what we have here is as good as it could be.

But as someone said.... it's a culture thing. Programmers don't want more people to learn how to code unless they can prove themselves 'good enough' in some way.

I don't mean to knock you guys either. The questions I've posted here have always gotten an answer. But never an answer a non-programmer would understand. Now if I'm not me, how am I going to learn if I don't know it already?

Please don't take this comment as arrogance, but I have to say that, for whatever reasons, there are some that just don't get "it".

I put myself through my last 2 years of college tutoring in Math and Computer Science, and well over half of the students I helped were those taking my school's introductory programming course.

I had countless students who, no many how many times it was explained, and in how many different ways it was explained, just wouldn't get "it". I remember many times where we'd step line-by-line through a simple snippet of code, with me explaining exactly what was happening all along the way, and then I would point to the line of code that was functionally equivalent to "llSay(0, result)", fully expecting the answer to be clear, only to get a puzzled look.

Its certainly not a reflection of intelligence, because I have known some very smart people who didn't get "it".

But I am convinced that there simply exists a class of people who never will fully comprehend programming concepts.

- Ace

I disagree. It is not a matter of intelligence, different people have different skill capabilities. Me, I will never be an artist nor musician. My day never understood Fortran but he was a great abstract thinker.

You gotta love this game. If I wasn't so busy, I'd take that challenge and teach me some monkeys to write some code!

Alas, I am too busy trying to become a slum lord via the drug trade.

On a more serious note, I truly believe it's all about understanding your problem. Not just anyone could write Second Life, but many people, I think, are capable of writing code to solve problems common to their every day lives.

I could go on with a lengthy explanation, but programming a computer is just a tad more difficult than, say, a VCR. It just needs to be made more accessible.

Yes indeed. One feature of the VCR is the clock and the fact that it flashes incessently until set. Why? What idiot came up with the idea that people wanted to be slaves to setting their digital clocks that seem to be on every new appliance down to the toaster and can opener. Let's look at that for a moment.

An engineer decided that it would be a good test feature if the chip that drives the display could turn on all the segments as a "lamp test" So far so good. Now the clock engineer comes along and uses the display chip and notices the lamp test feature. Now as a good-n-nerdy engineer he does not want this feature to go to waste so he has an epipheny <sp?> and makes the lamp test flash when the time is not set. This is _not_ the way to design a good product!

My solution is black tape over the flashing clock (I think Dave Berry got that idea from me).

Now lets look at the Linden Language (ll) trig functions. Well, the base "C" functions are in radians. Real handy for many math and physics problems like a ball rolling down an incline plane, but not for people. Look at a globe of the world, it does not have radians, no, it has degrees. Protracters, building equiptment, etc real world things that have to do with angles use dregees. As I watch the TV news I an told that the hurricane is at 26.7 degrees, not 0.466 radians.

Now it is time to include angle function in Linden Language so what makes sense? The engineer says: radians! So be it. But wait, is that a good choice for the users? Not a concern, the engineer made the correct decision, the decision to make that digital clock flash.

Thank you, Samhain. That is very generous of you. I went to the University and took a copy of every tutorial and made my donation like a good samaritan.

I opened the scripts in Scripting 101, and for some reason I was expecting a notecard with explanations. Silly me.

So, I'm going to spend the next week or so trying to figure it out through trial-and-error. If I have questions, which I'm sure I will, I'll IM you.

Yours,

M.

I appreciate your point. However...

I know for a fact that good judgment has nothing to do with how well a person can script. The best virii and DOS attacks are perpetrated by pubescent little fuckwit script-kiddies who understand the code perfectly without anyone having to spoon feed it to them... they just don't care.

The thing is, they have the exact same mentality about educating the public, and in fact, that mentality justifies attacking the public. So, making the walls higher does not cut down on griefing.

Just the other day, I was attacked by a giant roving penis that wandered through my sim unmanned (no pun intended) and batted about random avatars. Lovely. I'm sure it was scripted by someone with a gift for understanding C and LSL. Meanwhile, I'm still trying to get my avatar to sit right side up on my poseball.

Yours,

M.

I couldn't resist commenting. So please don't take this as arrogance, but...

Programming is not unlike quantum physics. There are two tiers of teaching it. One, is the conceptual, and the other is the functional. Often times, I see physics taught functionally first, and the concepts are come to only by trial-and-error. By that time, you already understand the jargon and are so inured in it that it becomes difficult to explain the meaning to the uninitiated - not because it's impossible or they are retarded - but because you are inexperienced with conceptual learning and teaching.

Here's an example. Imagine if you were trying to describe how a radio works to someone who had never seen one and was only vaguely familiar with a telegraph.

Would you begin first by explaining the history of it? Or maybe you'd describe the radio itself and the physics of radio waves, the different frequency modulations? Would you explain radio stations and circuit boards and vaccuum tubes? Perhaps have the person change the station a few times? It would surely take hours, yes?

Or you can do as Albert Einstein did:

"You see, wire telegraph is a kind of a very, very long cat. You pull his tail in New York and his head is meowing in Los Angeles. Do you understand this? And radio operates exactly the same way: you send signals here, they receive them there. The only difference is that there is no cat."

So, what is the cat in LSL?

Describe the concept of what programming is first, and then use familiar references to describe the functions... then show how the functions work within that framework.

Yours,

M.

Methods of thinking and intelligence are not the same thing. There are brilliant people in this world who are gifted in different areas. The extreme example are savants, people with great disabilities but great talent. Just because of talent in one area doesn't translate to talent in all areas.

There are two ways to come at this; one is to come at it from methods of thought and the other is ability at areas of thought. Methods suggests a single way for each person which is deceiving. People have different abilities at differing areas of thought. Very few people use only one method of thought.

I fully agree with Ace.

As it will come up (or already has): Why can't LSL (or all programing) be more like English? The answer relies on level of detail. Take for example instructions that would be needed to tell someone how to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. It's not as simple spreading PB & J on bread.

First we have to assume the person can grok the instructions. Then we need to have them find the jars, bread (if they don't have them send them out to get some more), and knife for spreading (we may need to give instructions on opening drawers and cabinets). Then we give instructions on how to open the jars and the bread bag (twisties can be tricky). Take bread from bag. Instruction on spreading PB & J. Put half's together so the faces match up. Cut in half. Eat or put in storage.

Now I've simplified the instructions from the base set as I've left a few out. English is a horrible language for giving instructions because of all the ways it can be interpreted and all the syntax structures that exist in it ("Time flies like an arrow but fruit flies like a banana.". You would need an AI to interpret your instructions if they were in English. One of the strengths of the C style syntax is it's ability to quickly describe a complex thoughts with the reduced possibility of confusion.

Programing is about giving highly detailed instructions and finding possible problems that might come up in the process of executing these instructions. I use to believe that anyone with hard work could become skilled in any field but over time I've realized thats just not true. I'm not saying people should give up; I'm saying know your limits (but do so by constantly testing them).



Yes anyone who can read micro$ofts VB (for applications) manuals and knows how to code can make a virus. This i blame on microsoft for not properly securing their interfaces. I'm no expert on TCP-IP but it's my understanding that a good chunk of the problem could be solved by router configuration. Better computer security on the zombie side should reduce the chances of becoming a zombie. DoS attacks are criminal but so should not fixing known vulnerabilities.



Sounds like you want a book. I'm all for a book but don't think anyone wants to put in the time to write one :-/
It could (read should) be hosted on the wiki.

Most of the LSL teachings don't tell people how to solve problems; only the syntax for doing so. Most of the bad code i've seen, the people know how to use the language (understand syntax) but don't know how to solve the problem at hand. They haven't groked the language. Teaching how to solve problems is much more involved then teaching syntax. Teaching problem solving also requires presenting multiple ways for the student to learn them (as there are multiple ways of learning) which requires alot of the teacher.



llSitTarget(<pos>, <0,0,0,1>/llGetRot());
should make you sit upright.
and if you want the pos to also be in global cordinants use
llSitTarget(<pos>/llGetRot(), <0,0,0,1>/llGetRot());



as you have probably guessed i code better then i write.

I'd be willing to write that book, actually. In fact, I was thinking about this in my car tonight.

You know, we could probably make a better book if it were collaborative. Would anyone else be interested in contributing to something like this? A book that begins with "What is Programming, and What Good Is It?" or some such?



Thank you!

[/B]

And I write better than I code.

Yours,

M.

il surly downlo.... i mean buy the book

suppose we (not saying i want to write a book at this moment) could write a book. (The only problem with it being a book is that every month or so LL goes and changes things; so the wiki would be best )

The obvious way to reach the next step in the "metaverse" goal as far as scripting is concerned is to release the scripting VM details and let the community build whatever they like to use it. It appears to me that LL has already created an architecture vaguely similar to the Common Language Infrastructure so why not release the details and allow us to upload our own bytecode binaries instead of spending time and money developing a 3-tier system which (I hope) will ultimately be scrapped for something better anyway?

This way, LL can focus resources on improving the VM capabilities beyond what I've measured as being similar to a TRS-80 Model 3 built in 1977 (in a sim with high FPS) instead of fumbling with language standards and compilation and other such things which are really not (in my opinion) part of the overall goal of SL in the first place.


On a related note, I think private sim owners should be able to write native Linux binary "agents" that run on their servers via an API with hooks into the complete SL server functionality. Only then will the limits of what we can do REALLY be infinite.

I think they want to release the byte code to someone that is deserving. Nobody at present has shown that (unless they are under a NDA).

The API hooks for land owners is a good idea.

aside from the defeciencies of the scripting language that everyone has mentioned... i think the complexity is where it should be... the people that should be programming are programming and if people want to devote the time to learn programming then a learning curve is to be expected.

you can't tell me that any newbie programmer can just plop down in front of a computer and learn C without putting forth an effort.

i don't think it is Linden's responsibility to make newbies understand how to program in their language as long as they provide the general documentation outlining the functions, etc.

i do not know C, i program in a 4GL RDBMS language called Progress (which is very english like) and i have done side projects on the web in perl and php with mysql. the LSL documentation and the Wiki provided everything i needed to get me well on my way.

i am a true believer that if you understand the basic concepts of programming, you can then apply that to any language as its just a matter of learning syntax and the certain rules that apply.

anyways, looking foward to making my contribution to the world... ive been signed up for a while but just actively started doing things a few weeks ago.

no, man.... what I'm tellin' you is that a newbie programmer could sit down and try to learn C and get fed up with it, even if they are capable.

That doesn't mean they don't need to be writing code, it means the language is awkward and ugly. There are all kinds of things about C that make it harder than it needs to be. Case sensitivity and those god awful braces are two things that come to mind immediately, but I can give you more if you want.

Can these things be overcome? Sure. So can the loss of a limb. Because any one of us managed to get through it doesn't mean that it's adequate.

And really, how could they make a language that is safe for the users to code in any more difficult? That's what they did.... they made a language that was safe, and then (perhaps unintentionally) they made it as difficult to use as possible.

I am mucking my way through it.... but it is still too hard.

shall i count the ways they could make the language more difficult?

Languages:

1. Assembly - no nice high level commands.
   
2. Brain F*ck - you can count the number of commands and operators on one hand.
   
3. - Forget the name of the language but all the commands are represented by as single character. (not talking about machine code)
   

Structures:

1. Function Pointers
   
2. Object Oriented (as a C programer i find Java more complicated)
   
3. Reverse Polish Notation