I''ve decided that rather than doing a scripting language from scratch (overkill), I''ll modify an already available one. Currently I''m going with Lua, since it has met all my demands in theory: free (even for commercial use) source code included simple but powerful language, quick to integrate with project easy to add new functions Other languages I have looked into: Python Small Language Anyway, I am mainly looking for simple and fast. I don''t need C++ here, just a simple script language. Decisions, loops, etc. Anyone have to say anythinga bout Lua or other language? Btw, I am working on a game engine, not MS Word, keep that in mind
Get Banner At: http://www.crosswinds.net/~druidgames/resist.jpg

Python has some advantages due to it''s popularity. One of those advantages is being able to walk into a book store and buy a book on it. Another is the extensive variety of extensions that have been implemented in it. Hopefully whoever is going to be using it in your game isn''t going to be doing COM, Sockets or GUI calls, but it does provide a wellspring of examples and ideas on how to interface to your game. I don''t know anything about the other two languages you mentioned, but the ability to create classes is a big plus. If the other support this as well then it doesn''t give Python an advantage, but if they don''t it certainly does. The classes let you abstract the interface to your game. That means you can have a rather complex set of rules on how and when you game engine can be called while still presenting it in a simple and straight forward manner. The COM extensions to Python seem a good example of that.

Hmmm, a book on Python? See that is partly why the language scared me off, it''s big enough to need a book. I didn''t explain myself too well in my first post, but i dont think that my purposes justify such a massive language. Im just doing a 2D tile engine that I hope will be one of the better (if not the best ) out there. It will be very strongly script oriented, because the not-often-used method of handling and storing tiles in my design makes for tiles that can take advantage of hard-coded stuff for common abilities, while taking advantages of scripting for some really neat stuff. To give you an idea, say I use this engine to write some cave exploring game, where u hunt down treasure while avoiding monsters and stuff. I go and put it up for download, and a fan could literally go and turn this game into PacMan without having to touch the .exe. All done through clever scripting. So in other words, I''m trying to do for a 2D tile world what Half-Life has done for the FPS world.

Don''t mistake me for trying to create a whole game construction kit. It''s simply a game that is very flexible, much like Half-Life, to the point where you CAN make your "own game", but that''s not what the product is being released as. There will be a full IDE that allows map making, scripting, tile building, object/creature creation all in one program.

I might also sell licenses to the engine for a few bucks or even free on the side, in which case someone could expand on it and make a whole RPG system or something, but that''s another story.

Now that I''m done rambling about it being really versatile, why don''t I get back on topic? Sounds good! Okay, so now, Python has books on it. That is big, too big. I just want a basic scripting languages that actually works, because all that Lex/Yacc stuff was giving me a headache and I couldn''t shake the feeling that I was overworking myself needlessly. I just want a core scripting language, simple ifs, loops, etc, so I can expand it. The way the engine works, you can do a LOT with the most basic of programming constructs. I''ve already basically "learned" Lua in like two days, so I''m liking it. ANd it works and everything. But if someone has had bad experiences with it, id rather know now.















Get Banner At: http://www.crosswinds.net/~druidgames/resist.jpg

That is an interesting perspective. I can''t say that I have ever heard anyone argue that readily available documentation was a bad thing. I suppose to each their own.