Difference between revisions of "Talk:Syntax"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Qazaaq (good idea, but worried about messing up the existing syntax) |
imported>Haama (database?) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
::A template for the syntax sounds like a good idea. It shouldn't be hard to write, replacing the syntax on the existing function pages is harder. We don't want the bot to mess up existing syntax that's not following the rules. I should really look into the bot more, it should be possible to create pages for new OBSE functions automatically. But let's finish this first. | ::A template for the syntax sounds like a good idea. It shouldn't be hard to write, replacing the syntax on the existing function pages is harder. We don't want the bot to mess up existing syntax that's not following the rules. I should really look into the bot more, it should be possible to create pages for new OBSE functions automatically. But let's finish this first. | ||
::--[[User:Qazaaq|Qazaaq]] 09:34, 11 September 2008 (EDT) | ::--[[User:Qazaaq|Qazaaq]] 09:34, 11 September 2008 (EDT) | ||
:::Would something like Wrye's setup for the [[Raw Function List]] help? That is, a "database" of all of the functions and their parameters, then use a bot to write up the functions from that database? I think this would be possible with vanilla functions - check out [http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Tes4Mod:Script_Functions this page]. Note Daveh is the author of the page, so he may still be able to help us. (and at least one point of interest - [[DuplicateAllItems]] has 2 parameters) | |||
:::--[[User:Haama|Haama]] 19:13, 11 September 2008 (EDT) | |||
Revision as of 18:13, 11 September 2008
A draft for a syntax article, please add/change anything if there's something missing. I think we can make the Syntax: on the function pages clickable and linking to this article. With the wiki bot of course, not by hand. Good idea?
--Qazaaq 17:24, 10 September 2008 (EDT)
- An excellent idea. All for it.
- A thought just occurred to me - might it be appropriate to have a Template for syntax? It would be a bit complicated to write, and it might also be complicated to use, but it would also ensure standardization. Advantageous?
- Dragoon Wraith TALK 19:55, 10 September 2008 (EDT)
- A template for the syntax sounds like a good idea. It shouldn't be hard to write, replacing the syntax on the existing function pages is harder. We don't want the bot to mess up existing syntax that's not following the rules. I should really look into the bot more, it should be possible to create pages for new OBSE functions automatically. But let's finish this first.
- --Qazaaq 09:34, 11 September 2008 (EDT)
- Would something like Wrye's setup for the Raw Function List help? That is, a "database" of all of the functions and their parameters, then use a bot to write up the functions from that database? I think this would be possible with vanilla functions - check out this page. Note Daveh is the author of the page, so he may still be able to help us. (and at least one point of interest - DuplicateAllItems has 2 parameters)
- --Haama 19:13, 11 September 2008 (EDT)