Macro Depot as a Files section?

Mckorr · Post by **Mckorr** » Sat Jan 18, 2003 2:11 pm

Was wondering if there was any interest in having a true Files Depot, rather than having to search through myriad posts here. Might make it easier to find the snippet of code you need, as a search for "uber.mac" can turn up not only the post with the macro, but 50 posts telling someone to "use the search function" instead.

Granted we get a lot of potential for leeches instead of programmers that way, but would reduce the load on the message boards as people continue to post "where can I find so and so".

GoatFoot · Post by **GoatFoot** » Sat Jan 18, 2003 2:15 pm

Mckorr wrote:Was wondering if there was any interest in having a true Files Depot.

I like it. How about reposting as a poll?

kazan · Post by **kazan** » Sat Jan 18, 2003 4:30 pm

only question is how does sf deal with bandwidth usage?

Malachi · Post by **Malachi** » Sat Jan 18, 2003 4:41 pm

I see that no mods have posted here, but I'll post the answer that I expect they'll post.

For the same reason that macroquest.ini.dist doesn't come packaged as macroquest.ini, having the macros be established as a files section makes life a little too easy. The way it is, you have to do a little work to get your handout, and maybe learn a little something along the way. Additionally, people may post to the files thread with questions and comments and etc, contributing to this "open source" community idear.

I think perhaps a better idea would be to get people to try to make sure they're posting in the right forum (COUGH COUGH this thread COUGH COUGH) to avoid making it any harder to find what one is looking for.

With that said, if you wanted to start a page where people could simply click to download a given script, feel free, but good luck getting all the authors of all the scripts to give you permission first, and good luck all together b/c as we know...probably about 75% of all scripts require individual modification...

So....in answer to your question, NO, the depot shouldn't be a seperate file section.

~malachi

SingleServing · Post by **SingleServing** » Sat Jan 18, 2003 5:32 pm

I wouldn't download a macro without reading it first.

Their will be some wise guy that will put in a hidden

/petition I'm cheating and using a macro

somewhere...

:Loop
/shout I'm cheating and macroing!
/goto :Loop

YKW-28983 · Post by **YKW-28983** » Sat Jan 18, 2003 7:02 pm

SingleServing wrote:I wouldn't download a macro without reading it first.

Their will be some wise guy that will put in a hidden

/petition I'm cheating and using a macro

somewhere...

:Loop
/shout I'm cheating and macroing!
/goto :Loop

i'm pretty sure you would read it after downloading, and if not you deserve that to happen.

L124RD · Post by **L124RD** » Sun Jan 19, 2003 8:44 pm

Salutations,
there are posting rules for this forum... no body reads them and people ahve been getting laxx... moving topic...

Mckorr · Post by **Mckorr** » Mon Jan 20, 2003 4:07 pm

My intent wouldn't be to make things easier for the leeches, but to make things easier for those of us who are used to object oriented programming.

I don't write code that I have written before. I keep a repository of code sections, and use them over as I need them. Before I do write new code, I check the company and online repositories to see if such or similar code already exists. Then I just modify existing subroutines, so I can spend the bulk of my time on NEW code, instead of retracing old steps.

I do the same thing with macros. I use code that already exists, tweaked or modified to get what I want. Then I just use #include to reuse these functions (or cut and paste, depending on the trouble I'm having calling external routines). So my idea for a file section would be one where people could find those #includes, categorized by type or function. Then people could concentrate on new ideas, instead of rehashing old ones.

L124RD · Post by **L124RD** » Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:30 pm

Salutations,
top of the macro depot: Last 5 updated macros
if you click it or the link that says 'goto Macro Archive' This is a file listing page with the allowence to post macros. These macros will be organized by date. The files MUST be in the .mac format. they will have a name, description and saved as Name-date-time.mac

What do you think? just a concept please don't post that you can't find what I described, you do and i'll ban you for the next 2 hours, provided I remmeber to unban you...

Mckorr · Post by **Mckorr** » Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:47 pm

That would work for scripting the archive for easier additions, with less moderation. I'd rather see things categorized, but I can understand how that would be a pain.

Two sections, one for mac format and one for inc?

And yes, I'm pushing heavily for OOM (object oriented macroing). So much easier for me, since I usually write my macros on the fly to do one or two specific jobs. I like reusing code without having to cut and paste it.

L124RD · Post by **L124RD** » Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:50 pm

Salutations,
what type of categories are you thinking of? melee, skill, casting, etc or... updating macros make sense to... each macro name has a directory and has old macros... was thinking more something like that so we have an archive of released macros... as for the object oriented part are you requesting something like Visual Studio type thing that does macro programming or what?

geostone · Post by **geostone** » Mon Jan 20, 2003 7:46 pm

i have web space i would be more than happy to donate to a files section if anyone would care to use it. that way it saves you guys on bandwidth and i get to feel like i at least did something to help. of course all i can supply is the space since im a real big computer idiot. please feel free to email me or post a reply here.

L124RD · Post by **L124RD** » Tue Jan 21, 2003 12:43 am

Salutations,
what webserver and do you have PHP (only language I can program in :p)?

Mckorr · Post by **Mckorr** » Tue Jan 21, 2003 8:46 am

When I use the term "object oriented", I'm not referring to a new development environment. I mean reusable subroutines that can be plugged into new macros so that they can be more quickly and easily constructed by calling external modules instead of cutting and pasting code.

For example, I might do

Code: Select all

#include fighting.inc
#include casting.inc
#include looting.inc
sub Main
/target "annoying orc pawn"
/call cast "root"
/melee
/loot
/return

The actual "new" code would be 4 lines, since I wouldn't have to rewrite the external "objects" of fighting, casting and looting.

MQ currently supports this pretty well. Would be better if it supported an include directory (call it whatever you want, include, external, whatever), but it is workable without this by simply agreeing on a syntax for the file extension (such as .inc instead of .mac).

Now, if someone publishes a better fighting routine, I simply make changes to that module, and that carries over to every macro I used fighting.inc in, without rewriting all the macros to use the new code.

As for categories.... fighting, casting, combining, hunting, bots, generic... I'm sure most of the macros here fall into one of the first 3 or 4.

I've also got plenty of server space... let me check for PHP support and get back to you. I only use maybe 5 or 10 meg of my 500, so a bunch of text files wouldn't be a problem. I normally use CGI, but if it'll handle PHP I'd gladly donate the space.

L124RD · Post by **L124RD** » Tue Jan 21, 2003 4:46 pm

Salutations,
a few things: 1) You thinking maybe classes then? ie

Code: Select all

| TargetClass.inc

#class _Target
  sub target_id
     /target id $p0
   /return
#endclass

Code: Select all

 #include TargetClass.inc
#use Targeter as _Target

...

Targeter.target_id $v0

...

just a concept DO NOT TRY ABOVE CODE!

2) well, it seems we have 3 people with space (and I can probably find at least 2 more) multiple mirrors?

Macro Depot as a Files section?

Macro Depot as a Files section?

Re: Macro Depot as a Files section?

Uhm....no.

Wel..

Re: Wel..