Difference between revisions of "No Limit Teleporter"

From Second Life Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (→‎Simple Teleporter - No Limitation: I have no idea what I changed because I lost the session lol)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
=Simple Teleporter - No Limitation=
Zero - Lag<br>
You can do anything, change the code and all more...
To use:<br>
[+] Set stapos (end of script) to the object position (where to back when the destination is reach).<br>
[+] Set dest (end of script) to the object destination.<br>
<syntaxhighlight lang="lsl2">
//Leave that here
//Script created by Morgam Biedermann
vector posnow;
vector stapos;
rotation rotnow;
teleport(vector dest)
{
    if(llGetPos() != dest)
    {
        llSetPos(dest);
        teleport(dest);
    }
    else
    {
        llUnSit(llAvatarOnSitTarget());
        teleports(stapos);
    }
}
teleports(vector dest)
{
    if(llGetPos() != stapos)
    {
        llSetPos(stapos);
        teleports(stapos);
    }
}
default
{
    state_entry()
    {
        stapos = <141,19,30>;
    }
    touch_start(integer vez)
    {
        if(llDetectedKey(0) == llGetOwner())
        teleport(<141,19,505>);
    }
}
</syntaxhighlight>
== Critique to the above script by [[User:BETLOG Hax|BETLOG Hax]] ==
== Critique to the above script by [[User:BETLOG Hax|BETLOG Hax]] ==


The above example is a really bad approach to use for many reasons. Not least of which is that lag is precisely what it ''will'' generate.
The above example is a really bad approach to use for many reasons. Not least of which is that lag is precisely what it ''will'' generate.


An equivalency check that respects SLs somewhat wiggly precision system, and isn't trying to match a movement to EXACTLY 6 decimal places of precision is needed.<br>
An equivalency check that respects SL's somewhat wiggly precision system, and isn't trying to match a movement to '''EXACTLY''' 6 decimal places of precision is needed.<br>
<syntaxhighlight lang="lsl2">
<syntaxhighlight lang="lsl2">
if(llGetPos() != dest)
if(llGetPos() != dest)
Line 30: Line 79:
</syntaxhighlight>
</syntaxhighlight>
And a system that has a user function call itself from within itself is probably not good.
And a system that has a user function call itself from within itself is probably not good.
This is '''MUCH''' better: ['''MUST''' be compiled in [[mono|MONO]]]
This is '''MUCH''' better: ['''MUST''' be compiled in [[Mono|MONO]]]
<syntaxhighlight lang="lsl2">
<syntaxhighlight lang="lsl2">
teleports(vector dest)
teleports(vector dest)

Latest revision as of 10:22, 24 September 2022

Simple Teleporter - No Limitation

Zero - Lag
You can do anything, change the code and all more... To use:
[+] Set stapos (end of script) to the object position (where to back when the destination is reach).
[+] Set dest (end of script) to the object destination.

//Leave that here
//Script created by Morgam Biedermann
vector posnow;
vector stapos;
rotation rotnow;
teleport(vector dest)
{
    if(llGetPos() != dest)
    {
        llSetPos(dest);
        teleport(dest);
    }
    else
    {
        llUnSit(llAvatarOnSitTarget());
        teleports(stapos);
    }
}
teleports(vector dest)
{
    if(llGetPos() != stapos)
    {
        llSetPos(stapos);
        teleports(stapos);
    }
}
default
{
    state_entry()
    {
        stapos = <141,19,30>;
    }
    touch_start(integer vez)
    {
        if(llDetectedKey(0) == llGetOwner())
        teleport(<141,19,505>);
    }
}

Critique to the above script by BETLOG Hax

The above example is a really bad approach to use for many reasons. Not least of which is that lag is precisely what it will generate.

An equivalency check that respects SL's somewhat wiggly precision system, and isn't trying to match a movement to EXACTLY 6 decimal places of precision is needed.

if(llGetPos() != dest)
//is bad
if(llVecDist(llGetPos(),dest)<0.001)
//is MUCH better

ie:

teleports(vector dest)
{
//    if(llGetPos() != stapos) 
// This an inherently bad approach; given 6 decimal places on 3 floats in a vector its 
// very UNlikely the equivalency will be precisely equal even if its VERY close, this 
// will become especially evident at high altitude. It'll look like its stopped, 
// but the llSetPos() will be still thrashing away. Possibly for quite some time/forever.
//
// the below will stop in a timely manner.
    if(llVecDist(llGetPos(),dest) <= 0.001)
    {   llSetPos(dest); //corrected variable
        teleports(dest); //corrected variable
    }
}

And a system that has a user function call itself from within itself is probably not good. This is MUCH better: [MUST be compiled in MONO]

teleports(vector dest)
{   list l=[PRIM_POSITION,dest];
    l+=l;l+=l;l+=l;l+=l;l+=l;l+=l;l+=l;l+=l;l+=l;
    llSetPrimitiveParams(l);
}