In response to Falacy (#18)
Falacy wrote:
None of it matters, really. The noobs who would need to use a library for something would never bother to actually read through it anyway.

noobs who would need to use a library

*cough cough* Really?


The awkwardly placed whitespace, and unnecessary comments certainly contribute to the poor readability.
He did over do the comments a bit, but I really don't see how its over complicated.
It's actually extremely simple.

In response to Chowder (#20)
Forum_account wrote:
One catch would be having a door that's shown as being two tiles wide on the outside but one tile wide on the inside.

Isn't that what the target system is for?
In response to Falacy (#11)
Falacy wrote:
His library is pointlessly overcomplicated, barely readable, and still has no type checking.

A library does not need to be readable or simple. Why do you think it does? A tutorial should be. A demo should be. A library? Nope. I don't understand why you think otherwise.
There's something I don't like about the first example:

turf/Enter(mob/m)
m.loc = locate(4, 30, 1)

It seems weird to start off showing the wrong way to do something. Maybe the reader wouldn't have made that mistake. There's nothing wrong with showing a naive approach and working towards some goal, but this starting point seems deliberately bad.

I realize it was taken from an actual post, but unless I'm missing something I don't think this is a terribly common mistake. If you had used Entered() in that example, you'd still have a lot to say to explain how it could be improved.
People do seem to confuse Enter() and Entered() a lot though. Another thing I've noticed is that a lot of people try to use usr in them instead of using arguments and asserting the argument's type.
Page: 1 2