Search function for the ruleset API

[Ken L]

Currently this is the process:

1. Find something you need information on:
https://i.imgur.com/DyfacOJ.png

2. Visit the ruleset reference and ctrl-F + ctrl-V your parameters....
https://i.imgur.com/7fef3P5.gif

There needs to be a search function.

PS: Perhaps Smite might want to look into a documentation generator (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentation_generator) if manual upkeep is too much. A number of these nuggets you have to scrape through CoreRPG to determine the functionality and duplicate it. Rather than labeling this 'complaining', this literally extends development turnaround as quick or reasonable time-frames are extended as you're forced to dig rather than rely on the reference. I like my free time, and spending it using grep -rn is a real kill joy to creating the extensions I want. My inventory locker extension alone took 6 months of on-off every other weekend scripting compared to a recent Open Stack package I completed in a single weekend....

edit stateframe is there, lose/gain focus are only on select controls

[Ken L]

so I was fiddling with number controls and found the focus bits and pieces so I'll recant that bit. Sill quite annoying finding these out piece wise.

[celestian]

I like my free time, and spending it using grep -rn is a real kill joy to creating the extensions I want.

We had a guy in our group that claimed his documentation was "in the code". Was pretty terrible. The only way to find anything was "grep -ir" and then figure out his code. He's gone now.

I'd certainly love better documentation and examples (I tend to do better with examples) and it would more than likely help out folks writing rulesets. A lot of my time (majority) is spent trying to figure out how things work. Maptools for all it's issues, their wiki was useful. You can just search for the function and almost always find the wiki page for it and about 3-4 use examples. I find the documentation on FG's (function/code side) to be less than useful and tend to revert to ... as you say grep -ir (or in this case notepad++ search through files).

When I really get hung up I ask in the forums and do get helpful responses. Moon has gone out of his way to help me a few times. I still owe him a 6-pack or 3.

More than likely this is a time allocation issue but it might help garner more support of rulesets/extensions if it was easier to figure out some of these things. Me? I'll just bash my head at it till I figure it out :)

[LordEntrails]

As we all know, this has been discussed in various formats several times. And though we know it would be useful, perhaps it might be best if a documentation effort was postponed until FGU is released?

I don't know about all of you, but at this point, anything that requires significant effort (and good docu would), I would prefer be deferred until after FGU is available. I think the future viability of FG is highly dependent upon FGU being released in a timely and successful manner. Though good docu will help the community developers significantly, and therefore will have substantial benefits for all users, I believe docu is not near the same level of importance as FGU.

[Talyn]

On the flip side, since they're aiming for 100% backwards-compatibility at FGU launch, any documentation we get now will still apply then. Even better, getting into a good habit of proper documentation now will hopefully lead to maintaining those good habits going forward.

Yes, it's very much an effect of limited developers with limited time. But the more attention FGU gets when it arrives, the more DLC Developers we're going to need to convert licensed products. All DLC is encrypted now, and there are limited resources out there for newcomers to get the markup/syntax/blahblah for any new features without that documentation.

[Bidmaron]

You will notice that none of the luminaries have chimed in. This is going nowhere, guys. Our software guys use a thumbrule that documentation on code that is good enough for other knowledgeable programmers (that is coders who know the language but not the application itself) to pick up from scratch requires twice the time that it took to write the code, and that is how they budget it if a client insists on such documentation. Needless to say, it doesn't happen often.

Give it up.

[Ken L]

There's a difference between being paid to dig through someone else's code and doing it on my free time, possibly to contribute. I've had to dig through a bunch of ugly code, non-documented code, and all manner of C infused with assembly (I work on embedded devices). The more difficult it is to develop on, the less incentive there is to create something, and even less to share it if the community response is 'git gud'. It's partially the reason why I haven't released a number of my personal extensions, and those I'm thinking of no-longer updating.

[Moon Wizard]

As always, it's about trade-offs. I've actually been slowly updating the developer documentation this summer in between my travel and other work.

I currently have a running log of API updates I need to make. If you have examples of missing pieces, you can post here and I'll add them to my list. Once summer is over, there will be more time to update without conventions and travel to interfere.

Regards,
JPG

[Bidmaron]

Thanks, MW, but what they originally wanted was a documented ruleset. We had one over ten years ago if I recall, but it languished. Anyway, more documentation is great, but I just can't see how a documented ruleset would ever be practical.

Personally, the thing I struggle with most are the windows anchoring. Every time I figure it out, it is transient, and the next time I need to do something with windows, I have to figure it out all over again. If I were to vote for one documentation, it would be a more thorough description of anchoring, relative, and the other options we have, with some examples of their usage.

[Nickademus]

Thanks, MW, but what they originally wanted was a documented ruleset.

No, they want a search function for the existing documentation for the API. Why is everyone ignoring the original post and continuing the conversation of the locked topic...

[Bidmaron]

Sorry Nick. I thought this was just new page of same topic. Seems harder to get context on small phone screen