Authors CurseForge

Hey guys,

I wanted to know how many notepad++ users would be interested in contributing to writing a function list that would allow us to do this :



Basically, it's about writing an xml file that contains the definitions, it's not hard, but there are a lot of functions (a quick copy/paste has shown me 1500+), so splitting the work would be a good idea.

As an example, the first function in the screenshot only need this:

  <KeyWord name="GetContainerNumSlots" func="yes">
   <Overload retVal="numSlots =" >
    <Param name="slotID" />
   </Overload>
  </KeyWord>

There are a few limitations to the system, like the fact that this feature was written for languages that only support one return value, but I worked around it by doing something like this:

  <KeyWord name="GetItemInfo" func="yes">
   <Overload retVal="itemName (1), itemLink (2), itemRarity (3), itemLevel (4), ..." >
    <Param name="itemID | itemString | itemName | itemLink" />
   </Overload>
   <Overload retVal="itemMinLevel (5), itemType (6), itemSubType (7), itemStackCount (8), ..." >
    <Param name="itemID | itemString | itemName | itemLink" />
   </Overload>
   <Overload retVal="itemEquipLoc (9), itemType (10)" >
    <Param name="itemID | itemString | itemName | itemLink" />
   </Overload>
  </KeyWord>

Nothing is set in stone at this point, I'll probably make this file for me, with the functions I use the most, but it could be an interesting if this was a concerted effort. I'll wait to see your reactions, and we'll start from there.

Feedback from non-npp users is also welcome :)

Thao

As an NPP user, I find this very appealing. One thing I would like to see, in the interest of completeness, is return types along with the values.

Also, is the only reason you split the 10 returns into 3 different lines so that it wouldn't extend off the screen? Or is there some sort of other limitation in NPP?

Quote from Thaoky

Hey guys,

I wanted to know how many notepad++ users would be interested in contributing to writing a function list that would allow us to do this :



Basically, it's about writing an xml file that contains the definitions, it's not hard, but there are a lot of functions (a quick copy/paste has shown me 1500+), so splitting the work would be a good idea.

As an example, the first function in the screenshot only need this:

  <KeyWord name="GetContainerNumSlots" func="yes">
   <Overload retVal="numSlots =" >
    <Param name="slotID" />
   </Overload>
  </KeyWord>

There are a few limitations to the system, like the fact that this feature was written for languages that only support one return value, but I worked around it by doing something like this:

  <KeyWord name="GetItemInfo" func="yes">
   <Overload retVal="itemName (1), itemLink (2), itemRarity (3), itemLevel (4), ..." >
    <Param name="itemID | itemString | itemName | itemLink" />
   </Overload>
   <Overload retVal="itemMinLevel (5), itemType (6), itemSubType (7), itemStackCount (8), ..." >
    <Param name="itemID | itemString | itemName | itemLink" />
   </Overload>
   <Overload retVal="itemEquipLoc (9), itemType (10)" >
    <Param name="itemID | itemString | itemName | itemLink" />
   </Overload>
  </KeyWord>

Nothing is set in stone at this point, I'll probably make this file for me, with the functions I use the most, but it could be an interesting if this was a concerted effort. I'll wait to see your reactions, and we'll start from there.

Feedback from non-npp users is also welcome :)

Thao

Neat idea. Now if only I knew of a linux-native editor as slick as Np++ I'd be all over this. =D

Quote from Brimmstone

As an NPP user, I find this very appealing. One thing I would like to see, in the interest of completeness, is return types along with the values.

Also, is the only reason you split the 10 returns into 3 different lines so that it wouldn't extend off the screen? Or is there some sort of other limitation in NPP?

The thing is that the hint tooltip does not spread over multiple lines, and the width can make it go out of the screen, so I thought about splitting it over multiple lines. The actual purpose of multiple lines is for languages that support polymorphism, but we can reuse it for this other purpose.

I need to play a little bit with it to find more limitations, but if we agree on a small set of rules, we can come up to a solution that helps a lot, even if it's not perfect.

As for return types, yeah, why not, the C++ examples in n++ actually do that, the only real restriction is the length we want to grant to return values vs the name of the function vs the length of parameters.

I like the idea, but I think it would be better to have a way to generate the .xml file automatically. This way it is easy to keep the file up to date with each new WoW release and there is less chance for errors when entering all the functions.

Maybe ask the people of wowprogramming.com, wowwiki (maybe wowcompares??) if it is allowed to write a script to scrape the API pages. Then it should be (relatively) easy to generate the .xml file automatically. Or maybe they even have the data in some kind of raw form that is used to generate their webpages.

I like the idea, much better than having people doing this manually :)
I saw that Kaelten is one of the guys behind wowprogramming.com, I'll send him a PM, he might be able to help or at least point me in the right direction :)

Cladhaire (the lead author of the book and admin of www.wowprogramming.com) previously told me he would run a script himself on the website database if anybody wanted an api reference to import into their editor. You'll need to provide the format info to him if he is still willing to do this.

I've spoken with clad, and given thoaky his contact info.

Thanks a lot !

I'll work out the specifics and get in touch with Clad over the weekend :)

I sent a mail to Clad after my last post, but didn't get any reply yet, and I haven't had time to follow up on this yet. I guess I should be on irc more often x)