Re: The future of PBW - a call to arms
I wish I knew more about how SEIV does things before I posted this so pardon me. But I see 2 "paths" here that are often used in writing something like this.
A) programming from the top down. The menu choices are written, the sub-routines ironed out, often results in one huge program in one specific language, using the system to answer a need is the Last consideration
B) designed from bottom up, system answers are put in place first, then routines to access them, finally they are put together under menus
Both have their pros and cons. A big part of it is that "A" is easier maintained by programmers, and "B" is easier maintained by SysAdmins. Also "A" is easier for fansites to setup, and "B" has advantages on a dedicated server.
Im afraid that if I were to flow-chart/psuedo-code a project like this it would be in "B" mode due to my background (and even then I would be mostly in linux mode asking for help from the Windows admins here)
It seems as though the PBW we have now is "A" mode. Which is fine but the pros and cons of it is something we are running into now. Id love to see it fixed up and back running. But I have more interest in seeing a "B" mode done than in seeing a different "A" mode.
This post may be way out of line and maybe I should start a different thread to explain a "B" mode layout so people can tell me that SEIV wont work that way?
[ June 09, 2004, 16:18: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]
__________________
-- DISCLAIMER:
This game is NOT suitable for students, interns, apprentices, or anyone else who is expected to pass tests on a regular basis. Do not think about strategies while operating heavy machinery. Before beginning this game make arrangements for someone to check on you daily. If you find that your game has continued for more than 36 hours straight then you should consult a physician immediately (Do NOT show him the game!)
|