User talk:Strife Onizuka

Strife Onizuka
is hereby awarded with the

Geek Award
for
the most creative template name:
Template:Template
by Zai Lynch

You found my talk page... Find old discussions at: User:Strife_Onizuka/Talkpage_Archive_01

Question about Template:Multi-lang

Heyas =)
I was trying to add the new version feature to the help template and stumbled upon a difficulty where I hoped you could help me with... I made a testpage at User:Zai Lynch/Sandbox/MLtest/de but it acts weird... when i make a change to User:Zai_Lynch/Sandbox/MLtest/version then the box is displayed at the test page. When I just edit and save the test page (without changing anything) it eats up the language bar. It acts somehow unexpectedly/random. I don't really know why it is... (o.O) Any ideas?
Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 19:42, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll take a look at the template and fidget with it. No ideas come to mind. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 20:00, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Kewl, thx! :-)

And I'll go to bed as early as 9PM for the first time in ages (o.O) gotta be ill... ^^

*sleepy* Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 20:07, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

hm... the bug seems to be very strange. And it isn't part of the template.

Please try the following and tell me what you see:

• Log out of the Wiki and then browse to Quickie_Wiki_Intro/Usercategories (or User:Zai_Lynch/Sandbox/MLtest/de). Notice: there is a language bar on top
• Log in the Wiki and look at the same page. Notice: Language bar is gone.
• Edit the article and preview. Notice: Language bar is visible in preview.
• Save the article. Notice: Language bar is gone again.
• Go to Special:Preferences and change the interface language (to German, for example). Notice: The language bar is visible...
• Change the language back to English. Notice: The language bar is gone again...

o.O Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 07:47, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Had to sacrifice a (unused) feature but it's working now. Weird bug nevertheless... Sorry for spamming

Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:16, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

grid list

Strife, I was wondering if you'd mind if I took the idea from the grids and downloads list that you have and turned it into a template since I know of a few places (my userpage for one :) ) where it could be useful and I didn't just want to copy off the code especially without your permission. Gordon Wendt 16:34, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Do what you want with it, I didn't put it in the global space because...

• Make changes without having to fix what it breaks.
• Unsure about who would want to use it.
• Didn't want to fix my content when others changed it.

To recap, you are welcome to reuse the code. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 20:24, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

LSL Category Localization Template

Heyas! =)
It's me again... I wanted to ask for feedback/input on these two templates: German, French.
It would be supposed to easily provide unified localized LSL cats so translators wouldn't accidentally connect an article to a wrong category when they'd choose another translation for the same word. I implemented a small test version in Template:LSL Function/de, Template:LSL Event/de, Template:LSL Constant/de, Template:LSLC/de and Template:LSLGC/de. I tried about 5 different ways of implementing the template itself (without database-slaves) but they all failed due to either wiki limitations or parser function bugs (it worked well in the sandbox wiki). I'd like to try it in the German localization (can't break much content there at the moment...) and in case it works out fine, Gally would be willing to help me for the French implementation. Do you have any objections against the template (could it break something? slow the wiki down?) or input, thoughts, ...? Are there more templates besides the 5 I already altered, where I should pay attention to?
Greetz, Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I've given a lot of thought to slaves in the past (there was a time I wanted a centralized function/constant/event description lookup for the "Also..." section). The correct way to implement them is to have a slave for each letter, the advantage is that slaves can have slaves. If implemented properly the cost is very small. The problem however is that you have to be conscious of the format. If you want to change the format you have to change the entire DB. I believe the best solution is to version each of the entries. Now at this point you need to take a step back and ask "Am I reinventing the wheel?" And the answer is "Yes". Essentially what you want is a database where you can feed it a key and get the stored value pair.

There is of course another solution to this problem. Make all the Categories smart so they can be included (like the PRIM_* flags), and pass it a parameter that tells it to only return the foreign language category name you specify OR you could make a subpage like we do for the translation version (which would be really smart) and just have the lookup table there.

Anywho there are my initial thoughts on this. Last time I checked MW executes both sides of a conditional, so you need to make it so what is inside the conditional is not the template but just the name of the template (so it only executes text and not a template). -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:42, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Thx for the feedback =)

@Slaves: I didn't wanted to use any slaves for this. My goal was, to have all translations stored on one page so that only that one needed to be localized. Unfortunatly, the else-if chain exceeded the maximum depth allowed by the mediawiki. So I tried to break the chain into two chains and store a variable value in case the first chain didn't give a result, so the second chain starts. This works in the sandbox but not over here due to the nasty bug you mentioned as well. I also tried a recursive process where the template called itself with a value but the Wiki complained again (it doesn't like loops...). After two other work arounds failed too, I had to create the slaves to do the job... But I'm not really happy with that solution since it splits my database into 2. Splitting it further (for every letter) would erase one of the benefits: easy localization. I think the database (around 100 terms in worst case, usually less cause not all terms need a translation) is to small to justify that.

The smart cat version is a way I thought about too (and Gally had a similar idea to unify categories on translated subpages), but the problem with it would be again that it is a decentralized implementation. Someone who wants to begin with a new translation of the portal would have to edit all smart-cat pages instead of only one (or two) database pages. So I would consider this method in case it notably decreases the load on the Wiki. I don't know how computationally intensive it is for the Wiki to check the current database slaves. In case it's to much, I'd like the subpage-lookup best. With some preperation (collecting translations for more than one language, like done with the HP L10n) and then add them all when we got maybe 5 or 6 languages.

Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 17:03, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

You would actually want to use "switch" instead of "ifeq", that said, you don't want to have a huge switch statement, it's not good for the wiki. Huge templates take a long time to execute (take a look at the templates on LSO, they take so long to rebuild that the connection times out and the wiki has a fit). Anyway you cut it, to add a new language would require duplicating the slave DB. It would not be fun. You may gain some centralization by having the Slave DB but to keep it from bringing the wiki to it's knees you won't have much. If we decide to forgo the centralization altogether and go with a system like the article versioning, we can solve several problems all at once that would have popped up as a result of having it in a DB. If we do it properly we can set it up like multi-lang with the articles in need of translation. Sure it would be a bear to setup for each language but the alternatives just don't scale or require maintenance to allow it to scale. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 04:25, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Just to make sure that we're on the same page: I meant one DB (or X slaves) for each language. Not one DB for all languages. The German templates would only call the German DB, French only French, etc. So the maximum else-if depth got an upper bound at the count of LSL cats (worst case, when every cat has a translation other than cat/ISO-CODE) which seems to be something between 100 and 110.

That beeing said, I got to agree about the LSO article. I also checked the L10n lookup database and got to say that it needs like forever to load... Might be since I included it a hundret times in the table to verify that all translations work right and (since most of the translations are missing) it needs to run the else-if chain till the end. So it would only be included about 4 times on an average article I guess. Load would then be roughly ((current load)/100)*4 + (load of other templates).

So I think we'll go with the smart-cat-subpage-lookup? I'd then need a complete list of LSL cats to hand them out to linguists to translate. I think the table should be complete but I'm not 100% sure. For implementation we'd need to take care of the input format. French translations use "cat/fr" as input while Japanese and German translations just use "cat". So we'd either need to add these differences at the subpages (bad imho) or make the template unify the input before passing it to the lookup (better imho).

Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 14:46, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

It won't be ((current load)/100)*4 + (load of other templates), it will be (current load)*4 + (load of other templates); there is no speed gain to my knowledge to a big switch statement (that I know of), it's O(N), not O(1). You probably don't want more than 25 items per slave, properly configured, it won't be much more costly then the slaves. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:27, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Currently, the template is included about 100 times in the table. At an average article, it would be only included maybe 3, 4 or 5 times. So it would be ((the load of the 100 includes table) / 100) * (number of inclusions in the article). That is what I meant. Not the else-if depth or the switch.

Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:37, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

MIA

Ouch, I hope you get yourself setup soon with a new job and computer, your a valuable member of the community and it would be somewhat depressing to lose you. I wish you good luck. --Nexii Malthus 10:53, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

What Nexii said... *adds home, job and PC to Santa's list for Strife, as well as a four leaf clover and a fresh polished horseshoe for the x-tra boost of luck*
Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 13:37, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

It all basically means I can't write scripts, login to SL or do much template work (alignment gets funky at smaller than 100% zoom). -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

take care... (o.O) hope you're one of them and we'll have you back soon. *hugz*
Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:57, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

*Borrows a computer* for the moment things are ok, after the holidays things will be a mess... *hugs* -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 17:04, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Geek Award

LOL. That really makes my day. As to the inspiration... I got sick of having to manually double embed templates to avoid the call cost. I had been wanting a null/empty template so I could have an if on the template name and so nothing would get included... but then I'm like, why not a variable template? So I start to write it and I'm then like? What to name it... I know "Template". On review though, the null/empty template is the better idea. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:44, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Glad you like it (^_^)

Can you explain why an empty template is reducing the load on the Wiki when you call it with a parser function as an argument? Has it got something to do with WEB-896?

Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:45, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Yep it has to do with WEB-896. Say you had the following code but you wanted it conditional:

{{ugly|ugly param1|ugly param2}}

The easy thing would be to just wrap it:

{{#if:{{{test|}}}|{{ugly|ugly param1|ugly param2}}}}

The problem is, Template:Ugly gets evaluated (and it effects #vars).

Lets look at this solution:

{{{{#if:{{{test|}}}|ugly|/dev/null}}|ugly param1|ugly param2}}

By putting the conditional around the name of the template, when the test fails it evaluates Template:/dev/null ... which does nothing, and with MediaWiki 1.12 template parameters aren't evaluated until they are first used by the template; so in this case, they are never evaluated. It gets us around the ugly problem of conditional templates getting called needlessly.

Historically I've used Template:! instead of /dev/null, for the only reason I hadn't gotten around to making the /dev/null template. This of course had it's own problems (specifically that it inserted a | (pipe character)). I'll probably start converting things over to /dev/null when I do template updates.

P.S. You nailed it on the head though, Template:Template is the result of me giving into my more nerdy tendencies. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:49, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh I get it. Is really a pretty creative work around! Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 03:01, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Haha, nice award. Template:Template is definitely something interesting. --Nexii Malthus 02:11, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Widgets

Kuraiko added the widgets extension to our sandbox and added your account to the widget editors group. So if you'd like to play arround with widgets in a sandboxed SLwiki-like environment in order to develop some for this Wiki, you can have a look there when you're back and got time and so... Keep in mind that parser functions are acting slightly different, but the rest should be the same and the content isn't so much outdated (maybe a few month old). Have fun =)
I hope it will all turn out well for you soon... oh btw: you got mail. Outdated though.
Greetz, Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Notecard campaign to M Linden

I have been distributing this notecard:

[If you agree, please remove this line, replace the signature below, and send to M]

M, 

Please hire Strife Onizuka; please read his user page: 

 http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/User:Strife_Onizuka

I don't know him personally, only through his volunteer work,
and I'm not related to him or interested in this financially.

Would you please ask the Lindens in the HR department to read
https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/User:Strife_Onizuka and see if
he's ever applied, and if not, invite him to using his email
address on file, and if so, resubmit him to jobs
http://lindenlab.hrmdirect.com/employment/view.php?req=27066 and 
http://lindenlab.hrmdirect.com/employment/view.php?req=26066 ?

Thank you.

JS Uralia

JS Uralia 03:26, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

As awesome as that is, I somehow have a feeling M Linden would be too overwhelmed with other inventory gives, IMs and other dialogs. --Nexii Malthus 17:47, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I haven't applied for a job with LL in 4 1/2 years. The triage job doesn't sound like a job I would want to do on a full time basis. With all honesty I don't think I'm skilled enough to be a senior developer for LL; I've met several of them and I don't feel I'm smart enough. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:45, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

I didn't knew if I should answer to the topic, though I need to disagree now. I can not tell about your knowledge in C/C++ (etc.) or about the needed experience for the job. You might be lacking either or both and that might be the reason for not applying. But you're definatly not lacking smartness in any way. You've proofen that uncountable times.

Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 05:20, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

WB

Glad to see you're still out there! Lack of life signals made me worry :-S Hope you're ok... Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:33, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Just stealing some time to catch things up. Things are pretty dull (to the point of insanity) here, I got a job working 3rd shift at a convenience store. The work is ok and the pay isn't terrible but it isn't something I want to do for much longer (I took the job to see if I could do it). My right knee started complaining in October and just a couple weeks ago my left joined the rebellion (along with a pain in my lower lumbar, though stretches help with that... now I can just about touch my toes). My flat feet determine how many days a week I can work, turns out two days on and one day off is what I have to do to avoid stabbing foot pain. My carpal tunnel fortunately enough has not reared it's ugly head. Any who, I figure it will look good on a Resume. With the economy as it is, I don't know when I'll get my computer fixed. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 03:26, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Sounds as if you're having a tough time. Was hoping for something more disney-esque to colorize your life... I don't really have an idea how, but in case I can help with anything, ping me via mail or here or so anytime! And leave a lifesign every couple of weeks plz (o.O)

Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 17:12, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I wish you good luck! And thank you for updating LSL http server/examples with your correction :) --oobscure 00:05, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

NP, It happens that the (keyword) change is the result of one of my feature suggestions. It's nice to know that I may be disconnected but not out of mind.

I like to think of it as that part of the movie where the bad guy has it all his own way right before the hero makes a comeback. The job has been a good thing for me though, it's taken a bit of the cynicism away and dowsed the growing self-entitlement. The years of being a forum moderator took a lot of the cartilage off my personality; the job has forced some of it to regrow, for me to be less abrasive. The one thing it does lack is that "It's ALIVE, Mohohahaha" feeling you get with programming. Programming is chiseling you ego, your expertise, your farsightedness in stone; cleaning and stocking shelves is just pushing a boulder up hill, though serving customers has it's rewards. It is nice to be able to work with people, I missed that doing freelance programming. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 16:58, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Thx for enhancing the function with the bitwise shift! =) I gotta confess that I had no clue about that operator.

@ {{dev/null}}: I'm not sure if it's still needed, since we finally got an up-to-date parser functions extension (WEB-896) and it might not execute both sides of the conditional anymore. And we got Cite! Still no collabsible tables tho...

Your ability to analyze yourself and look at the positive side of thinks is... Just wonderful :-) Miss that so often when people tell about their lifes. Keep that! It's refreshing =)

Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:44, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Free Hugs... Beware!

Had to think about you when I noticed more free hugs at a softer world.
(^_^) -- Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 15:31, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Categorization

I've been running through Special:UncategorizedCategories trying to cut down the number of entries there.

I've reverted the help portal mod to Category:LSL ^_^

SignpostMarv Martin 21:23, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Wiki Contributors

Heyas :-)
2 questions:

1. Did I miss someone?
2. Template:ZWSP (and ZWJ + ZWNJ)...? Can you name a possible usecase for the first one and tell what the other two are going to be about? (o.O)

Greetz ^^ Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

ZWSP is the name of the character (Zero Width SPace), it might be useful when you need to kick the wiki engine into doing something that the parser doesn't want to let you do (like having a # as the lead character as a result in an #if and not have it put it on a new line *rolls eyes*). The other two, Zero Width Joiner and Zero Width No Joiner, are similar character, according to Unicode they cause certain characters to take on different forms when put next to each other (combination characters: Mayan? Chinese?). I really wanted Zero Width Non Breaking Space but my computers font doesn't support it (it would have been really useful, it would be a character that I could put anywhere, you wouldn't see it and it would have no effect except on the wiki engine) oh well. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 03:14, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Ah, yuss, makes sense as first character of the line. I'd <nowiki>#</nowiki> but {{ZWSP}}# is nicer. Thanks for the explanation :-) Added it to the toolbox.

-- Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 11:27, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Why didn't I think of <nowiki>? -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 17:16, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Would have been to easy ;-) *hugz* Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:52, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Because I don't say it enough

And haven't said it recently to you but I should tell you directly, despite the emotional limitations of words: thanks for continuing to persist and relentlessly contribute to this wiki and to broader understanding of technical knowledge for so many Residents, AND myself! Since the beginning of my SL and seeing your tortured prim display, you've been influential on the later decisions I'd make to enlighten our communities. - Torley on 2009-04-17 @ 10:29 AM PST

I'm not the type to point out the obvious... I consider a lot obvious that others don't. I often don't say what's important because of this, or what should be said or even what needs to be said.

You are one of SL's greatest assets, you have done not just good works but great works. You have carried the torch of enlightenment better than anyone else. When others around you had lost their cool you kept yours. I have always struggled to achieve the completeness your works exude, you make me strive to do better, your work has always inspired me. You honor me too much. It has been an honor to work with. It has been an honor to be your friend and I am honored to have inspired you.

For me the inspiration came from the short science fiction stories that I grew up on, the stories that shaped the minds of the computer communities of the 70's and 80's. The stories that had a kernel of truth in them: the context of the stories turned from science fiction into fact as hardware and software evolved. Stories that talked about governmental abuses, untrustworthy 3rd parties and the erosion of rights & privileges that are now all to poignant and relevant. I came by the ideals of GNU honestly and they left a deep impression on me. Why try to dam and control the rivers of information, to push it into canals and reservoirs only to portion out small amounts? Let the information go where it wants, give people access to it, let them work with it, they will amaze with what they do with it. But this isn't the 80's or even the 90's and that ideology just doesn't work anymore, there is a dark side to it which people have focused on; they have trouble focusing on enlightenment. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:31, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

You asked me to elaborate on my recent edit to llGetLocalPos()

Although I sent you a note in world I have not heard back from you as yet. I tested the return of the function in the same object as both physical and not. It returns the same vector!!?? I have thus removed my edit. However in my defence I will say that I only added what is stated in the lsl script (when hoverng over the function with the mouse pointer). I don't understand why "If the script isn't physical" is mentioned. Perhaps you could be so good as to explain sometime. Not sorry but confused.

Eddy.

I don't get in world very often unfortunately... (my main computer died and this one is pretty crappy, the experience isn't fun). My perspective has been: The tooltips are often wrong and should not be trusted. That said, if you find one that is wrong you should open a [jira.secondlife.com jira issue]. In the past LL was really bad about LSL documentation (they still are but they are getting better), both forms they provided (tooltips being one) were often wrong and incomplete; and this was the driving force behind the community creating it's own wiki. This and other things LL did jaded the community. Trust has been a big issue, many of the older scripters have developed a high level of apathy and just don't report bugs. It's a sad state of affairs but generally getting better as LL becomes more responsive. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 20:34, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanx for the rapid response. Although I really don't know if the tooltip is wrong. My limited experience does not really qualify me to say. I just tested what happened in physical static, physical moving and non physical and the same vector was returned in all 3 cases. I see this as "proof" that the function acts the same way whether in a physical script or not but then my cyber kitty isn't going or a walk as it should and I can't find any good reason why not. So I am perhaps not the best judge of whether this is a JIRA worthy issue. If I KNOW something to be wrong I will report it (as I have) but I really think it would be better for someone with more experience to test this one out before it's brought to the attention of the world wide wiki!! (About my kitty...I am begining to wonder if I have found another bug to be honest. I seem to have a knack for it)

Cheers for now, Eddy.

I didn't remember it acting differently between physical and non-physical but I was giving you the benefit of the doubt (you might have done original research). It's frowned upon to post something vague like what you did in the documentation, stuff like that should be posted on the discussion page; it just isn't useful to document that there is a difference but not to document what that difference is. It's bad style to post things you haven't verified, it can be disruptive and counter productive. You are new, we understand, you are forgiven. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:12, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Turns out kitty was just being fussy about her vectors. Sometimes the compiler is a little less than specific when it matters eh? Anyway I will watch my additions carefully and be sure to only add what is true, accurate and relevent (of course this would be easier if LL didn't do the oposite in there own scripts). TTFN

Might I draw your attention to llGetLocalRot() ? Within this very wiki.

Another case of "(If the script isn't physical)". I didn't do it!! lolz. Do you or anyone else know why so many tooltips mention this physical script condition/variable?

The documentation was originally written from the tooltips (I kid you not). (P.S. Please sign your comments with ~~~~ -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 20:57, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Okies. -- Eddy ^{(talk|contribs)} 8.29am GMT, 27 April 2009 (What does "UTC" stand for?)

UTC is almost GMT (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coordinated_Universal_Time ). Tho you don't have to do the hard work in manually creating your signature. Just write four tildes (~~~~) and the wiki will automatically convert them into your username and a timestamp. When you'd like to have a custom signature, you can go to Special:Preferences and play around with the Signature option :-) More info on that @ Wikipedia

Greetz, Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 08:00, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Lynch. I am not very knowledgable with computers. Still have trouble opening files and simple stuff like that. This wiki is a maze of links and I am afraid that even though my locic works just fine my knowledge is lacking. (I may need to edit this if I get the signiture bit wrong...Just type four squiggles...Here goes!). EddyFragment Robonaught 08:19, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, looks well! And call me zai ;-) Greetz, Lynch ^{(talk|contribs)} 08:28, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Sry zai (not Lynch). Good to meet you. -- Eddy 08:43, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes the transclusion in LSL documentation does make it difficult to learn but it does make things so much easier to maintain once you have learned it. Consistency in layout and content is much easier with the transclusion IMHO. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:50, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Having looked up the word Transclusion I have to assume you were commenting on my comment about all the links. I have no problem with links but while I am not the most experienced user on earth I find it daunting and time consuming to follow. I am personally far more concerned by the number of occlusions and errors in the documentation than in how the aforementioned is presented. \o/ for big words. Eddy 10:38, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Please, if you know of any error in the documentation, please fix it* or at the very least post a comment about it on the article's talk page. I take errors very seriously but I can't fix what I don't know about. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 11:48, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

*Don't be vague and don't be surprised when people edit your text, be prepared to explain your edit.

Thoughts on built-in preprocessor

What are your thoughts on a built in preprocessor for SL? Obviously #import would not be supported but the rest could probably be managed. --Aeron Kohime 05:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think adding a preprocessor is a good idea. There is just too much evil and bad code you can write with a preprocessor and it would be devilishly difficult to document properly. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 16:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

SVG vs PNG

Just curious why you uploaded the PNG images instead of the SVG images.

SignpostMarv Martin 10:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

WEB-573 has come back. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 15:58, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Hierarchics

I agree the CheckValidity is not appropriate for a public script. But I thought I should really better throw the script first onto the wiki, or I would never have gotten around to pushing myself to the point of doing so. Thanks for the fix on the edit mode, I think that was a terribly nasty bug I had a very hard time trying to debug! Nexii Malthus 00:03, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

I know just how hard those can be to track down. Sometimes it just takes a fresh set of eyes. I'm looking forward to playing with the script inworld. So far all I've done is check to make sure it passes lslint. I myself wrote a hierarchy script ages ago but I had the problem where I wasn't sure exactly how I wanted it to function and that made debugging impossible. It worked but I never knew if it was working correctly. Now that someone else has done the hard work, I can augment it with a float encoder and maybe optimize it too. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:36, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Strife. llGetLinkKey looks a mess to me.

I just figured it would be better for you to take a look than for me to start changing things but it does appear to be "cobbled" together somewhat. Not what I would say seems to be your preferred standard at all for this wiki. Take it easy Strife. Eddy 09:41, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah it is a bit excessive, I'll try to reword and simplify. The trouble is, sometimes you are so close you just don't have the perspective. That said, I may not have understood what you are hinting at, could you be a bit more explicit, which sections need work? -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 11:34, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I gave this some thought on my way home from work and came to the conclusion that the "Returns a X" wordage needlessly complicates the description. Consequently, I've changed the template to now support "Returns the X". I'm also considering adding a qualifier to go before the type "Returns the Y X" but that spoils the point of the syntax, which is that the type is supposed to be prominently placed in the sentence, if we don't force this why bother having a transcluded sentence at all, the author can just use the func_desc instead... but then does the type need to be the third word in the sentence? I don't know. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 12:45, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Strife but I have no idea what you are talking about with the X's and Y's. But then I am a noob. I guess the "mess" I was referring to is the fact that the function appears to not do more than it does do. Like all the FLAG's not returning the correct results or as stated not working. But mostly I think the statement "The other link flags (LINK_SET, LINK_ALL_OTHERS, and LINK_ALL_CHILDREN) don't make sense for this function." doesn't seem very well explained to me ("don't make sense"????)(What the hell is that supposed to mean?). Considering that on more than one occasion you have told me to explain my comments if I make them (fair enough) I thought I should point out this page to you since I am not qualified to change or explain the entry myself. The omissions and errors I referred to on the "Transclusion" topic are finding functions with almost no explanation or one so complex that is would only be useful to someone who already knows what it all means, or finding (as previously discussed) comments that are incorrect (such as the myriad of comments about physical scripts not supporting a particular function when in fact they do). I admit freely that I am a learner and on many occasions I will be wrong when discussing or commenting on LSL but the whole point of the portal is for learners to gain insight on the subject and yet much of it is so complex one feels that one needs a portal that explains how to understand the portal. I am beginning to rant and so I close with ---- Generally the info herewithin is pretty good if one uses a bit of smarts and tries, tries and tries again until it works. You may recall following me to "do" and rewriting the wording for my addition to the examples since there was no explanation for the block statements loop. That is an example of omissions and how I try and learn and then comment on my findings. It's a good job wikis are community projects eh Strife? -- Eddy 11:48, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

That's right, they don't make sense to be used with llGetLinkKey, take for example the LINK_ALL_CHILDREN flag, it causes the result of the function to be applied to all prims in the object except the root prim. LINK_ALL_CHILDREN in effect is a push flag, llGetLinkKey's parameter is a pull parameter. What is the uuid (key) of all child prims in the object? It's undefined, it doesn't make sense to use LINK_ALL_CHILDREN. The LINK_* flags would make sense if the function were llGetLinkKeyList but it's not.

Omissions I will accept, we haven't finished writing the documentation. If you find an article that needs fixing at the very least add it to the FixMe category and write what needs to be fixed in the Edit Summary. When it comes to examples, more than half the articles need better examples. More than half the constants need descriptions; of those with descriptions, half need to be rewritten. There is so much work it's hard to know where to start, to make matters worse the community does not agree with what the documentation should be either; it's all compromise and balancing interests.

As to better understanding the documentation, we are currently working on that. The plan is to add a link into the top of the articles providing a link(s) into tutorial that discuss the underlying topics; the community is writing the tutorials as we speak. One of the topics to be discussed in the tutorial will be how to understand the documentation, specifically explaining the organization and how to find information in it.

I was using "X" to indicate the return type of the function and "Y" to represent a qualifier. I was talking not just about llGetLinkKey but the all functions and the function template. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:41, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

WOW Strife!! That all sounds extreamly positive. I would love to be involved in the process. As I am still learning and thus my scripts are quite bad (I would prefer to say simple but I have to be honest) I dunno if my examples would be much use. however if I knew how to get around better I would happily get to work on writing some examples for the functions etc that need them. Would you be so kind as to tell me how I find those functions without going through them say alphabetically? One thing I would say I might be most useful with regard to is the fact that I am just learning and thus have a fresh view of how to understand this stuff. I am very keen to help but I really am not very computer smart (I started to learn HTML before I knew how to open a file) (seriously). Can you advise on the best way for me to get involved? Please. -- Eddy 03:22, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Just discovered the usefulness of "History". I may understand this one day. Hope you approve that I posted your explanation of the FLAGs into the caveats of llGetLinkKey as it is the very info I would have liked to have seen there before. -- Eddy 09:48, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

It's a good starting point (using my explanation) but the example isn't needed to communicate the concept IMO, just a better explanation. The problem with my explanation is that it is too long to be placed in the caveats section. Here is a list of topics in need of examples Category:LSL_Needs_Example -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 15:07, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Some advice, people will edit what you write. If they edit it, it means they agree that the previous wording (previous to your edit) wasn't good; if they thought the previous wording was better, that you contribution was without merit, they would revert your edit outright. But if they edit it, even replacing all of your contribution, they are still acknowledging that you were right that previous wording was bad. So don't be offended when people edit, consider it as someone voicing their opinion and perspective, just as you have just done. If you feel your wording is better, start a discussion; don't revert unless you really think there is no other recourse. As you become familiar you will learn when it's ok to revert an edit; which relies mostly upon sharing the "vision". The revert is not something to be trifled with, nobody likes it but there are lines that should not be crossed. Now people will edit for all sorts of reasons. Editing is a dance; sometimes things will get awkward and we will need to take things slow; sometimes we will step on each others toes; sometimes someone will go around insisting their way is the only way to dance. Basically what I'm saying there is an etiquette but wiki etiquette is so different from anything else that people have trouble learning it. Don't be afraid to ask questions.

To me the only thing that matters (on the wiki) is the content. I don't need to carve out a name for myself, to erect a monument to my ego; I frown upon anyone who tries at the expense of the content, the content is more important. We aren't carving out niches for ourselves; we are making a home for the community.

I think you may just bring some much needed insight into what the wiki needs. Novices don't comment much but it is so easy to forget what it is like to be one. -- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 15:58, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Strife. I am actually honored by your help and introduction. One question about "but the example isn't needed to communicate the concept IMO". Do you mean the script example? As a novice I can say that script is not very helpful and in fact as it is too complex for a novice I thought it counter-helpful (if you catch my drift). If you mean that your own desc. of why the flags make no sense for use in this function, I personally think you are wrong. The description you gave me is perfect for a novice and has opened my eyes to how functions and flags operate in a way that I had not previously understood. I think that sort of simple honest explanation of the workings of LSL is precisely what is needed. I hope you meant the script example was not needed rather than your own desc. But if the length of the caveat is a problem perhaps a shorter more simple script example with full step by step explanation in orange would be ideal.

Thank you very much for passing me the link. I am glad you trust me to go forth and edit. I am aware of how knowledgeable and philanthropic you are in the LSL community so your support and advice is greatfully received. And if you want insight into how it feels to be a novice....I clearly remember looking at a simple particle script months ago and trying to figure out how to change the color. I am not kidding. I had to ask for help too. If you want noob then I'm your man. -- Eddy 04:20, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Just looked at the entry. i see what you mean now. Should have looked before of course. I still thought your description was kick-ass. that whole pushme-pullyou thing is an eyeopener. *slinks away feeling a lil silly* (note to self-look at entry before commenting) -- Eddy 07:00, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

You don't need to feel silly, happens all the time.

There are a few good reason why you should go forth and edit.

• You learn how to edit and you way around the templates... and some LSL too.
• The only thing worse than bad documentation, is no documentation.
• It's easier to extract gold from muck then it is to extract gold from nothing. Meaning: it's easier to fix someone else's contributions than write the contribution from scratch.
• Your posts will contain gold, it will show.

As to your edits today, they are good. One thing for the future, here on the wiki we accept both K&R and Allman indent styles; you don't need to change them to Allman. While we could specify a single style for all examples we don't because it's a contentious topic. By mixing between the two we get users accustomed to seeing both styles. In the wild people use what ever style they want... all to often I see new users not using a style at all (and it makes for terribly hard code to read and maintain).

-- Strife ^{(talk|contribs)} 12:40, 14 May 2009 (UTC)