Talk:GCA Character Sheet

From GCAWiki

Current Discussions

Once the holidays are over I'll have time to get back to this. Right now, however, my TODO list looks like:

• Finish fleshing out each of the current object pages.
• Add new pages for each of the, currently, undocumented interfaces generally available to sheets (e.g. ItemsByType).
• Come up with a list of examples, great and small. Then write each example.
• ...

I've also gone ahead and protected several of the related pages to head off vandalism. — tmedwards 18:44, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Archived/Old Discussions

Ending: November 15, 2008

Alrighty. I've got the first batch of interface docs up, for the Char object. Does that look OK? — tmedwards 12:14, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Looks okay to me, although I always see the sample block as the header, since there's not really a lot of visual separation between the actual headers and other text. -- Armin 18:36, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. Short of finding/creating some templates to help set everything off, I think the easiest thing we could do is to bump each API section to its own page in the Wiki and have a link to it from here. That would give each property/function its own level two, or maybe three depending on how the page was structured, header which stands out a lot more than the level four headers they have here. — tmedwards 22:39, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

As a follow up to my last comment (above): I went ahead and split the individual object interfaces to their own separate pages. There's really too much different stuff that needs touched on to keep everything on one page. That's helped with the function/property headers, as they pop more now. I also indented the code examples, via <blockquote>, for now. Let me know how that grabs you. — tmedwards 16:20, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

You've done a bunch since I checked here last. I like it much better, thanks. -- Armin 03:56, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Got some more done this morning. I think it's coming along nicely now; I particularly like the new interface hierarchy diagram, rather than the old list. Just a whole lot a data entry left. — tmedwards 13:26, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I rather like the diagram as well. And data entry is the boring part of docs. -- Armin 21:16, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

I corrected BlockIDKey and ParryIDKey to reference the fact that they return an item's ID Key instead of an index. An item's position in the collection may change, but the ID Key is unique for the item on the character. So, if you have an item's ID Key, you can prefix it with "k" to get the collection key for the item, which is the unique string index into the collection for that item. (There are a couple places in GCA that use/store the IDKey, and a couple that use/store the Collection Key--why it's not consistent is historical and annoying, but not really worth my time to change.) -- Armin 18:44, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Good to know. I have to admit, I was guessing on those two, I've never seen them used anywhere. It's also finally good to know why the heck parent children and package kids have the whole "k" thing going on. I always wondered what that was about. — tmedwards 22:39, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Ending: November 07, 2008

Rather than just posting a list of properties, functions, etc. I was thinking about adding some JavaDoc/NDoc style commentary to them. For example: [..example removed..]

Although, for the wiki, it might make more sense to mark them up somewhat like we have been doing: [..example removed..]

Comments? — tmedwards 21:21, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I like the idea of the expanded posting. Thanks. I also like it marked up, as it feels more readable to me. Also, it'll be important to make it clear what functions are actually Char properties, and which are part of the print wrapper (although that may be clear from how the page will be written, I thought it best to mention it). -- Armin 21:37, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh yes, definitely. I've got the character API and printer API docs in separate subsections on the page. — tmedwards 21:51, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I actually noticed that after I posted that comment, but then got distracted and forgot to note that here. Thanks. -- Armin 23:17, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh, speaking of the print wrapper, if you're really going to discuss VSPrinter directly, I think it should be made clear that most of the print wrapper functions exist to simplify that. -- Armin 21:37, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

My current plan is to mostly just cover your wrappers. I probably will touch on a few direct VSPrinter topics, and I'll certainly point them at the online API docs at ComponentOne, but those will be the exception and not the rule. If anyone wants to become a VSPrinter power-user, they can use the ComponentOne docs like I did. — tmedwards 21:51, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

That's reasonable and logical. I do try to update the wrapper any time I find myself having to go to VSPrinter itself, so hopefully, by now, there won't be much that anyone would need there. -- Armin 23:17, 7 November 2008 (UTC)