28 Mar, 2009, flumpy wrote in the 1st comment:
Votes: 0
Hey

Want a mud written in the hottest java scripting language? Want to learn a commericial language AND write your own mud?

Check out the GroovyMud mud engine, written in Java with the mud code written in Groovy! The binary is in the mudbytes codebase, but you can also check out the googlecode project at:

http://code.google.com/p/groovymud/

I also need people to help me make the example mud more exciting, and to do alpha testing.. so pile on in!

Cheers

Matt
28 Mar, 2009, Idealiad wrote in the 2nd comment:
Votes: 0
I did check out the googlecode page, and it looks rather neat. The thing that has always scared me off of java however is its apparent verbosity – is that an accurate characterization and how does that relate to groovy?
29 Mar, 2009, Fizban wrote in the 3rd comment:
Votes: 0
Idealiad said:
I did check out the googlecode page, and it looks rather neat. The thing that has always scared me off of java however is its apparent verbosity – is that an accurate characterization and how does that relate to groovy?


Not sure how it relates to GroovyMUD but I had to take Java classes in college and I would definitely call it verbose.
29 Mar, 2009, flumpy wrote in the 4th comment:
Votes: 0
of course, everything you can write in Java you can write in Groovy, but Groovy has short cut syntax

read

http://groovy.codehaus.org/Differences+f...
http://groovy.codehaus.org/Collections
http://groovy.codehaus.org/Closures

example difference:

Java code:

List myList = new ArrayList();
myList.add("foo");
myList.add("bar");

Groovy code:

def myList = ["foo", "bar"] as List
29 Mar, 2009, Fizban wrote in the 5th comment:
Votes: 0
Err, aren't those just macros specific to the codebase?
29 Mar, 2009, flumpy wrote in the 6th comment:
Votes: 0
Hey Fizban

I don't understand.. macros? Codebase? Sorry I'm lost.


The groovy example I gave is real code not just mud macros… groovy is a compiled language (compiles to JVM bytecodes) just like Java except that it can be done at runtime with the GroovyScriptEngine.

Some other examples would be (i haven't checked these btw :)):
def objs = [1,2,3,4]

objs.each{
it ->
println it - 1
}

would give

0
1
2
3
4

which would be exactly the same as

List objs = new ArrayList();
objs.add(new Integer(1));
objs.add(new Integer(2));
objs.add(new Integer(3));
objs.add(new Integer(4));

Iterator x = objs.iterator();

while(x.hasNext()){
Integer nI = (Integer) x.next();
System.out.println("" + nI.intValue() - 1);
}


Can you clarify what you meant?

cheers
29 Mar, 2009, Fizban wrote in the 7th comment:
Votes: 0
My bad, from the first post I thought GroovyMUD was just the name of the codebase and that it was written in Java. I didn't realize Groovy was an actual language similar to Java and that it wasn't actually written in Java.
29 Mar, 2009, Idealiad wrote in the 8th comment:
Votes: 0
It doesn't seem like you're hosting an alpha test of the server right now, but I just wanted to check – is there an address where we can check out the mud without downloading and running our own version?
29 Mar, 2009, flumpy wrote in the 9th comment:
Votes: 0
I'm working on it!!!

i'm trying evileyehosting but they're not being very responsive atm :(

i'll keep you informed.
29 Mar, 2009, Kline wrote in the 10th comment:
Votes: 0
*plug for loohosting.com*

I don't use them (cept a test account; thanks!), but some friends do – quick reply :)
29 Mar, 2009, Cratylus wrote in the 11th comment:
Votes: 0
flumpy said:
I'm working on it!!!

i'm trying evileyehosting but they're not being very responsive atm :(

i'll keep you informed.


Yeah, my account got wiped last week without warning and I
can't get them to respond to email or on their own forum…so I'm
not sure I can recommend them at all, really :(

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net
29 Mar, 2009, Fizban wrote in the 12th comment:
Votes: 0
flumpy said:
I'm working on it!!!

i'm trying evileyehosting but they're not being very responsive atm :(

i'll keep you informed.


I'd suggest http://www.zeno.biyg.org over evileye.
30 Mar, 2009, David Haley wrote in the 13th comment:
Votes: 0
flumpy said:
List objs = new ArrayList();
objs.add(new Integer(1));
objs.add(new Integer(2));
objs.add(new Integer(3));
objs.add(new Integer(4));

Iterator x = objs.iterator();

while(x.hasNext()){
Integer nI = (Integer) x.next();
System.out.println("" + nI.intValue() - 1);
}

In modern Java, this would look like:
List<Integer> objs = new ArrayList<Integer>();
objs.add(1);
objs.add(2);
objs.add(3);
objs.add(4);
// well, really I'd do it with a for loop, e.g. for (int i = 1; 1 <= 4; i++) { objs.add(i); }
// or create a List from an array, so you could pass in {1,2,3,4}

for (int i: objs) {
System.out.println(i - 1);
}


Taking advantage of things like auto-boxing, especially.
30 Mar, 2009, flumpy wrote in the 14th comment:
Votes: 0
a better example is groovy's string manipulation:

disclaimer for David: this is only an example!!!!! :D

Java:

public void printHello(String name){
String myString = "hello "+ name +" how are you?\r\n" +
"this is quite hard to read";
System.out.println(myString);
}


Groovy:


void printHello(def name){
println """Hello $name,
this is a bit easier to read?"""
}
30 Mar, 2009, Grimble wrote in the 15th comment:
Votes: 0

Just wanted to commend you on getting this developed and released, it's healthy for the community.

I hope to do the same, but have quite a bit more work to do yet. One general question I'd like to throw out to the forum, and unrelated to anything specific about this MUD platform…

If you look back at platforms like the original Diku, they essentially work out-of-the-box. That is, you get a complete and playable MUD, and can go right to work extending/tweaking it.

The flip-side of that are platforms like teensy MUD, where you get just the core services (or not even that much) and a clean slate for the world and its rules.

Which release approach is better? Of course this is a subjective question, but it seems that the out-of-the-box approach has been more successful in terms of adoption rates. My guess is because it's easier to understand the features and capabilities of the platform by the example of the existing game built on it. Thoughts?
30 Mar, 2009, flumpy wrote in the 16th comment:
Votes: 0
Grimble said:

Just wanted to commend you on getting this developed and released, it's healthy for the community.


why thanks, did it all on my own.. the coder attached to the mud is really just getting involved..
Grimble said:
Which release approach is better? Of course this is a subjective question, but it seems that the out-of-the-box approach has been more successful in terms of adoption rates. My guess is because it's easier to understand the features and capabilities of the platform by the example of the existing game built on it. Thoughts?


I would say a bit of both.. nobody likes re-inventing the wheel. Get some basic examples in place (I'm trying some guilds and stuff) and people will probably adopt easier, although I obviously have no experience in this area, this being a) my first mud engine and b) my first real foray into mud coding after playing..

what are your plans btw?
02 Apr, 2009, flumpy wrote in the 17th comment:
Votes: 0
Idealiad said:
It doesn't seem like you're hosting an alpha test of the server right now, but I just wanted to check – is there an address where we can check out the mud without downloading and running our own version?


Hey Hey

Here's an alpha testing server, kind courtesy of Zeno!!

telnet://zeno.biyh.org:2223

please be kind, its really only at an alpha stage. The example mud is tiny, with limited functions and some bugs i already know about (like the "Your name is not in our annuls" coming up even tho you already logged in and you have been saved)

if you notice any other issues not already in the tracker then please add it here:

http://code.google.com/p/groovymud/issue...

cheers!
02 Apr, 2009, Sandi wrote in the 18th comment:
Votes: 0
Grimble said:
If you look back at platforms like the original Diku, they essentially work out-of-the-box. That is, you get a complete and playable MUD, and can go right to work extending/tweaking it.

The flip-side of that are platforms like teensy MUD, where you get just the core services (or not even that much) and a clean slate for the world and its rules.

Which release approach is better? Of course this is a subjective question, but it seems that the out-of-the-box approach has been more successful in terms of adoption rates. My guess is because it's easier to understand the features and capabilities of the platform by the example of the existing game built on it. Thoughts?

I think this is a good enough question to deserve its own thread.

Actually, I suspect there are more Tinys out there than DIKUs. It's misleading and hard to track, as TMC is avoided by many Tiny players, but there have always been more Tinys than ROMs. And a Tiny is in between a DIKU and a Teensy. It depends on your audience, really. There will always be a large market for ready-to-run games that only need a new connect screen to make someonefeel like a gameowner.

Personally, I think what's needed is a game where everything is done in OLC. MUSHes are close to this, but the interface is still a bit "code like" for many literary types. We need to let people with good ideas make good games, not just CS majors.
02 Apr, 2009, quixadhal wrote in the 19th comment:
Votes: 0
I've always liked LP's, because they bridge the gap in a sense. They expect and encourage you to write code for everything, which means everything can be extended in any way you like… but because it's in an interpreted environment, you don't get the "be careful, or you'll break EVERYTHING and the game will be down for hours and hours" problems that DIKU's have.

I think a lot of people have great ideas for a game, but don't want to spend month after month having to build infrastrucutre, or worse yet, fix existing bugs in the infrastructure, before they can even start to work on THEIR ideas. Heck, I spent so long fixing my own Diku that I probably forgot half the ideas I had when I started.

Personally, I think providing a SIMPLE example game is a good way to go, but make sure it's very clear how everything works. That is, document everything that happens from the server booting up, to the player logging in, and down to the actual combat systems, etc. One of the big drawbacks of many games is that you really have to know how it all interacts to make real significant changes.
0.0/19