LÖVE

Ooh, also, something that I've also tripped over when learning Lua: saying "something = {}" will empty out a table if it already exists. A misplace declaration can destroy a newbies game and they might have no idea why.

tentus wrote:Ooh, also, something that I've also tripped over when learning Lua: saying "something = {}" will empty out a table if it already exists. A misplace declaration can destroy a newbies game and they might have no idea why.

Interesting. What did you expect it'd do then?

In a few game-related languages I've used, table = {} will leave existing table alone until you start writing to it. Even then, I can think of at least one instance where table[1] = "something" leaves table[2] alone. I'd have to do some digging to find out which languages do what, but it's still something that I've tripped over and will probably continue to trip over because of it.

Hi everyone, thanks for the feedback!

I've corrected the English errors you guys pointed out. Thanks a lot, they were awesome!

("allways" instead of always is a common mistake of mine).

Ryne wrote: Just a question though, were you planning to expand into platformer's? I would personally love to see that, though I'm sure once you go into collision (which I also assume will describe the player interacting with grid coordinates) it would become very easy to progress it into a platformer. (I also wouldnt mind supplying some sprites for that, maybe even a custom "love-version" of the character in my avatar :p)

I wasn't really planning into that. I choose RPG-like game because it has less logic (you don't need to model the jumping physics). Let's see what we can do when we finish.

Robin wrote: One thing I noted was that you seem to require Lua knowledge, but also explain very basic things. One especially is that you assume your readers know how local vs global variables works in Lua, which is quite a delicate topic, but also explain tables and loops, which is a good thing, but all together not very consistent. The loops are the "worst", in terms of that they seem to assume the reader isn't very experienced with programming in general.

I noticed the same thing, and have been thinking about how to deal with it. Perhaps creating a "Lua basics" part and moving all the lua-specific stuff there, and linking to them when they are needed.

Robin wrote:BTW, I can edit these pages, would you like me/us to weed out typos and whatnots that way?

Yes - all of you, please feel free to make direct corrections on github. That will be faster and more efficient. And it would be more convenient for me.
But if you can't/don't want to get a github login, feel free to keep posting your comments here, and I will manually upload them - no problem.

I've started writing the 1c wiki, but will have to leave for now - still have to do some Christmast gift shopping. Seeya!

The loops are the "worst", in terms of that they seem to assume the reader isn't very experienced with programming in general.

If it wasn't for that I would be very confused. I think my favorite thing about the LOVE engine is it's ease of use. I think it's that ease of use that will drive new programmers to use it. The fact that the tutorials (kind-of) spoon feeds it to you is (in my opinion) the best part. After reading The tutorial so far I can program all of it without looking back, and actually understand how it works.

Ryne wrote:

The loops are the "worst", in terms of that they seem to assume the reader isn't very experienced with programming in general.

If it wasn't for that I would be very confused. I think my favorite thing about the LOVE engine is it's ease of use. I think it's that ease of use that will drive new programmers to use it. The fact that the tutorials (kind-of) spoon feeds it to you is (in my opinion) the best part. After reading The tutorial so far I can program all of it without looking back, and actually understand how it works.

I have re-arranged the wiki and moved the Lua-specific texts to their own part.

So the loop & table clarifications are still there, but now are on a link that says "If you don't know what nested loops are, go to this section". Or something like that. This should satisfy both of you, I hope.

G'night!

kikito wrote:This should satisfy both of you, I hope.

I'm just trying to give the reader as consistent a tutorial as possible, so I think you have found a good solution.

Wait you can use different pot width and height and not get npot errors on old cards?
I always thought that some old cards still needed squares,is this abstracted by love itself? aka it creates 2 x 128 texture if its a 128x256 image?
Also am I correct in assuming that a quad references u v texture of the image and doesn't cut it and makes a new texture so a quads dimension can be totally arbitrary?
Always had this questions on my mind...

adrix89 wrote:Wait you can use different pot width and height and not get npot errors on old cards?
I always thought that some old cards still needed squares,is this abstracted by love itself? aka it creates 2 x 128 texture if its a 128x256 image?

AFAIK, square is not a requisite anywhere.

adrix89 wrote:Also am I correct in assuming that a quad references u v texture of the image and doesn't cut it and makes a new texture so a quads dimension can be totally arbitrary?

I'm not sure, but I think the outcome is correct. My old computer, which was NPO2-unsafe, could display arbitrarily sized Quads just fine, as long as the base image was PO2.

Started recreating my game with the tutorial today. I'll put it to the test and let you know If I have trouble with anything!