[a3om]

During my work in SA:MP I have developed I think a lot of useful things. And this is one of them.
You know, for example you can write this:

PHP Code:

public OnPlayerConnect(playerid)
{
    Player[playerid][Player_Connected] = true;
    Player[playerid][Player_Money] = 1000;
    SetPlayerPos(playerid, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0);
    
} 


But I suggest you write this:

PHP Code:

public OnPlayerConnect(player)
{
    Player.Connected = true;
    Player.Money = 1000;
    player.SetPos(0.0, 0.0, 0.0);
} 


I know, it looks strange. But can you imagine how convenient it is? And fortunately it's possible. I think it will save your time because you will write less. I should add that this is not all. If you like this trend, I'll tell all my ideas about it and show how they can be implemented.

Thank you.

[Ada32]

i'm looking at you're catalog and it's empty..

anyway, how is this convenient?

[a3om]

Yes, you're right, I don't often write in our forum.

If you have a large amount of code in your gamemode it's much easier and readable I think. Also you print a lot less characters. This reduces the number of unnecessary operations and makes sense to concentrate on.

[AlonzoTorres]

That's called object-oriented scripting. In this case the object would be the player.

[a3om]

I'm very glad you think so, but it's only implemented in usual Pawn and it only looks like object-oriented scripting

[AlonzoTorres]

Quote:

Originally Posted by a3om I'm very glad you think so, but it's only implemented in usual Pawn and it only looks like object-oriented scripting

Yes that's what I meant.

[Ada32]

Quote:

Originally Posted by a3om If you have a large amount of code in your gamemode it's much easier and readable I think. Also you print a lot less characters. This reduces the number of unnecessary operations and makes sense to concentrate on.

that's a rather poor argument.. but anyways, if you're trying to push for a pseudo class-like structure (that's actually far beneath the intended purpose) and group 32-bit blocks then it's essentially the same as using arrays :\.

[a3om]

Hm... Don't get me wrong, but I don't want to change the structure of the programming language. I just want to make the syntax more convenient.

I do this because in our code has a lot of repetitive places. Look at this:

PHP Code:

public OnPlayerConnect(playerid)
{
    SomePlayerFunction1(playerid, ...); // the first repetition
    SomePlayerFunction2(playerid, ...); // the second
    SomePlayerFunction3(playerid, ...); // the third
    ...
    // And there is more
} 


Obviously, all this code we are talking about one player. Why not simplify it?

PHP Code:

public OnPlayerConnect(player) // playerid -> player
{
    player.SomeFunction1(...);
    player.SomeFunction2(...);
    player.SomeFunction3(...);
    ...
} 


Looks nice, does not it?
And look at this:

PHP Code:

players.for
{
    if(!player.IsConnect()) // or !Player.Connected
    {
        continue;
    }
    
    player.Kick("You're a cheater!");
} 


It's very simple.
And this is a loop through all connected players:

PHP Code:

players.connected
{
    player.SetVelocity(0.0, 0.0, 1.0);
    
    // or
    
    Player.Velocity.X = 0.0;
    Player.Velocity.Y = 0.0;
    Player.Velocity.Z = 1.0;
    player.SetVelocity();
} 


This is the normal loop:

PHP Code:

for(i -> 10) // this is equivalent to: for(new i = 0; i < 10; ++i)
{
    // something there
} 


[Ada32]

what?

someplayerfunction 1, 2 and 3 obviously do something. so how is it repetitive to make calls to functions that do something

anyway, how are you planning on implementing this?

edit

judging by that^ post, you're goal is to emulate objects in pawn (so its much more than a syntax change). y_less had a topic on oo (i'll see if i can find it) and you should probably contribute your ideas there..

[a3om]

I have already implemented and used it in my designs. It very helps me because it's simple.

Of course, these functions do something. Buy I have meant that "PutPlayerInVehicle(playerid, vehicleid, 0) is a repetition. Why write it twice?

Yes, I would gladly

It's not an object-oriented approach. It's likely to system-object-oriented approach. There is a system (such as "players") and there are objects (such as "player") in it. It's simple and clear.