![]() |
Graphical Interface
4 Attachment(s)
Here's a simple gui effect
HTML Code:
//#CLIENTSIDE |
Looks nice. Script is a bit long for this, but that's not a problem. Long scripts don't usually mean anything.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
bytes mean nothing, really. NPC-Server reads through it the same (though it's on the client in this script), so no harm, no foul. |
Quote:
But hey, that's just my point of view. |
Quote:
PHP Code:
|
With coding/scripting, it should be a practice to make codes/scripts as efficiently short as possible.
|
Quote:
PHP Code:
|
Quote:
|
It's good practice. IE, it might not be completely useful in Graal, but it is in practice. Small changes in scripts and making it shorter and more efficient for Graal might not make a difference on its own, but do so to a bunch of scripts and it will.
Also, for coding, it's very important to code efficiently for various reasons. |
Quote:
|
Why do
PHP Code:
PHP Code:
Sure, the first way works, but it's silly to not try to improve your scripting by finding shorter alternatives. Like I said, it's better practice. There may not be any hard evidence as to why, in terms of efficiency, but you can learn a lot of things by trying to think outside the box and find ways to shorten your code. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I never said anything about something like that. If there is a way to make it shorter, fine. I'm saying long doesn't mean bad, which is true. Short doesn't even mean more effiecent, though it can be most of the time. |
Well you quoted my post and asked why, and I answered. I never said anything like long means bad either, but you still asked me why I posted what I did. So why did you ask if you weren't looking for an answer?
|
I'm with Inverness on this one, seems like you're just arguing to be arguing.
|
Okay, first, argueing is good for you--it's proven. I am a rebellious person. I don't think people should be making blanket statements like shorter=better.
So, whatever. Let's stop this arguement. Basicly, we now know the following: -Shorter != More Effective -Shorter USUALLY = More Effective -Shorter NOT ALWAYS = better -Longer USUALLY != better Well, let's just stop this. We aren't accomplishing much of anything. Peace out people ^^ |
How is me showing an example of shortening a script NOT relevant to a discussion about shorter vs longer??? That makes absolutely no sense.
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Why? Because you said what you wanted to say?
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Ah. Arguing is healthy as long as it's you. If anyone else wants to defend their statement, it's no longer healthy and you don't want to hear it anymore.
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
I'm not trying to provoke fights, I'm still sticking by what I said, and I see it no different than you sticking by your opinion, except you want your word to be the last.
|
Quote:
|
Hmm? I'm on right now?
|
Quote:
Add me! :) |
Quote:
|
Okay, my post is fixed. I edited it so it does not state my views.
Now, let us end this arguement please :) |
Food Fight!
|
::throws trout at Novo::
|
Quote:
Quote:
Also, as the others said, you cannot only get your words out and end an argument. If they want to just not respond back, that is okay, but I definately wouldn't demand it end one sided, unless the argument had a clear one side in the first place. At this point, a big nonsense argument ensued. Lately, it seems every thread is all about an argument, and it is wearing my patience thin. Enough. Anyway, back on topic, Andrew, this is a fine example ^_^. There are little things you can do to optimize it, like only update the sprite you need to, instead of the whole thing, but since you aren't running a timeout anyway, this would save a negligible amount of processing power, so IMHO it is fine as is. I personally would not have done the array thing, but my personal preference does not make it wrong ^_^ |
ok!!
::throws cabage at Hell Raven:: |
| All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:16 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright (C) 1998-2019 Toonslab All Rights Reserved.