If you use a compiled language, it scarce matters how many extra lines of code you use, no matter how slow your CPU. The compiler ignores all verbiage and most of the round about crap most of us code, and sends it concisely.

Compilation takes measurable time. A ZOC script is not compiled until you invoke it, TWX dunno. Each time you invoke a ZOC script, it is compiled before it is sent, and before it can react to a "zocwaitfor", for that matter.

Terminal programs such as telix, qmodem, procomm were written for 286 machines running under W3.X, when speed was everything. Any script written in them is compiled before used.


quote:Originally posted by Singularity

EP, reason I asked... timing is an area I've never delved into. Prior to
recently I was on a very fast computer and an extra few lines of code really
didn't add any execution time. I didn't feel it was worth the investment of
time when that time could just as easily be used elsewhere. Then I get stuck
in a slower laptop for a while where just doing a getdistance takes a visible
amount of time. My thoughts on that changed immediately (started using a lot
more loops)... =)

Crosby...
Nice thing about bursts is they all go to the server at once, instead of
sending a little... waiting, sending more. It's risky in cases of blind warp
as sev said, but it can get you out of sooo many sticky situations.

Uhm kav. No offense but that just isn't true. Compilers compile into a bytecode,
but lines of code translate directly into that code. Extra lines of code mean
extra instructions to process. Even in modern optimizing compilers you still get
a lot of extra instruction sets that can slow things down, especially if written
w/o considering cycles. All scripts in TWX are compiled when ran, then excuted as
a compiled script. This is "very fast" in human terms, but in computer terms it
takes real processing time. The problem w/ old term programs is how limited they
are. They may be faster, but that's by sacrificing capability.

Wow, awesome read!! This is some of the stuff I was wondering about; isn't a .cts script already compiled? So in addition to a very simple 'write-protection' it is already in an executable form, no delay to compile, is this true?
I realize all this stuff is 'blindingly' fast to my eyes, I'm curious about the limiting factors of the machines performance, and timing in terms of mSecs, like +EP+ mentioned. I'd just as soon start learning to script with the fastest baseline language, so I can grow into it, rather than finding a year from now that I have to learn a new scripting language to stay competitive.

Traitor, thanks for the advice on Macros, I have a bunch of basic combat MAC's on ZOC hotkeys. I would use 'em, but I'm trying to avoid combat just yet, as I'm still too 'innocent' at face to face combat. I'd just as soon lurk in shadows and invade en masse when my opponent is offline/distracted. **off topic**
I like how this topic has swerved into term programs, but I've got a lot of 'search and read' before I'm ready for you guys to rehash a lot of old debates. That's one topic that has hundreds of hits.
Thanks for your time everyone,
--Crosby, Still Learning...

Sing, you are correct. I have a decompiler for SALT, years since I last used it. Tried it today, the decompiled scripts differ from the ones I originally wrote only insofar as they lack all comments, and string and integer variable names are changed to Lstring1 etc and Lint1 etc. It also does a real nice job of tidying up my scrawls by indenting nested statements

Cros, Traitor is also correct, I am probably the last left using SALT in twar since Zoobar and Gypsy retired. Unless you are familiar with C language, it is not worth the effort to learn it. No one to share scripts with. TWX is great, I use it to a limited extent with SALT. ZOC is probably the way to go (may the Good Lord forgive me) - it is easy to learn and write.

AFAIK ZOC 4.15 never expires btw, dunno if it is limited in capability compared to the most recent version. I have had it for quite a while and it still runs ok, no nag screen, no load delay.

Wow! That really brings me back Kavanagh! If you are that devoted to Telix and SALT, you must have used the old DOS helper Tradewars Guru. That had SALT scripts that worked with the Guru to gather and analyze game data. I still use it because it has some features still not implemented in swath or any of the newer helpers. I updated all the scripts a while back. If you are interested, shoot me an email at brett_quinn@yahoo.com and I can put you in touch with the author.

Skukkukt
brett_quinn@yahoo.com

I'd be interested to hear what <uselful> features TradeWars Guru implements that modern helpers do not.

Kav, after you've seen how consicely I was able to write your queries, you still think ZOC is better??? I was able to write some in just a couple of lines thanks to the TWX database (ZOC has no DB to query). Sacrilege. Blasphemy I say. I hate REXX (what ZOC scripts are written in) and never had an idea why a scripting language would be so syntactically non-English. Heh, reminds me of Java.[:P]

And Crosby, to answer your question, yes, .cts files are already compiled, so that step is omitted when they are loaded into TWX. That step is usually miniscule, but can be significant when loading large scripts like some of RammaR's, or Traitor's Move Helper

+EP+

EP, I share your disdain for REXX, however, ZOC is a very easy language to learn and use, it is similar to the "pidgin" languages. Likely because it was originally written for German speakers, but based on REXX.

I was not implying that it was a great language - I have vituperated about it in most tw forums for years.

As a terminal program to run in front of twx for a newbie - none better. If one cannot write a script in ZOC/REXX, forget about ever writing scripts.

In closing, the twx scripts that you gave me were indeed concise. Far more so than I could have written in SALT, let alone in Zoccer Rexx:)

In one word they were "elegant" and I welcome this public opportunity for so saying.

Kav

EP,
TradeWars Guru tracks all the same kind of things twx does, ports, figs, dead-ends, unexploreds, hostile sectors, etc. It can tell you nearest pair to trade, or closest jump point to reach some destination. But the two features I find most useful in Guru that I haven't seen anywhere else is a long-path optimizer for eprobing which sets avoids for you, and a hidden loop finder. A hidden loop is a tunnel with both ends in the same sector, so there is only one entrance, but it doesn't have any dead ends in it.
And it was written over 10 years ago!
Skukkukt