SRL Archive - Discussions and Debates

Would it be plausible to throw a custom SRL stats + core data (colors/func's/etc) into a .dll? I ask out of curiosity - because you could definitely have everyone who doesn't know what they're doing, use the .dll thus increasing SRL stats variables. My concern is that it would be considered "evil" in a sense, whereas people wouldn't want to use web-accessible links in that sort of manner; in which I personally (if I were a novice / new SRL user / didn't have any grasp on coding) might be weary of this idea.

Any insight to offer to this? Please post! :)

I think it would be Lazaurs + snyapse for the .dll source / makeup

(Perhaps somebody might also comment with the extent a .dll could maximize within a simba script, and where it looses potential/efficiency within a simba script)

Cheers,
Lj

I don't exactly understand what you're asking, adding SRL Stats to a script is already simple to do.
Or would you want the posibility to include a dll at the beginning of a script, which handles the Stats completely? (as in finding what the script is doing and commit those variables)
Please elaborate :p

From: Chris
I don't exactly understand what you're asking, adding SRL Stats to a script is already simple to do.
Or would you want the posibility to include a dll at the beginning of a script, which handles the Stats completely? (as in finding what the script is doing and commit those variables)
Please elaborate :p

Yes, I was thinking along the lines of taking the SRL stats code from the includes and writing it in lazarus with snyapse, so that the .dll holds all the stats info + core script info, making it necessary for regular users to use the .dll, which in return returns a higher amount of srl stats use/info gain on your script.

From: Le Jingle
Yes, I was thinking along the lines of taking the SRL stats code from the includes and writing it in lazarus with snyapse, so that the .dll holds all the stats info + core script info, making it necessary for regular users to use the .dll, which in return returns a higher amount of srl stats use/info gain on your script.

I don't think it was ever the intention of stats to force people to use them.

From: mormonman
I don't think it was ever the intention of stats to force people to use them.

Was actually against the rules at one point.

Nothing wrong with using plugins though. :)

Ah, okay thanks for feedback; for future use of SRL stats within my scripts, I'll leave it user-editable within the simba script.

Also, to save another thread for this question, are .dll's better than using an include in a script? (i.e. - Make a .dll for intermittent functions/procedures, rather than including another simba file) Just wondering - if it's too much to explain, I'll research ^.^

Ty again for replies,
Lj

It would be a waste of time, but yes you could do it.

Just make your script so that if they dont enter a STATS username, you give them the anonymous one…

@Yago,
Yes, I have that implemented in a script I'm working on.

However I was thinking of a case where the script-user deletes the stat's support from constants/the setup of srlstats from the script. However, I suppose it's not a huge implementation to 'force' them (a script-user) to use srl stats in the first place (as suggested earlier) as well as a new found perspective from this thread that: I suppose if they care that strongly and have the knowledge to remove srl stats, then I can let that be.

Total mind-changer-thread, glad I posted it;
Thanks too for everyone's replies! :)