[vworld-tech] Modern MUD server design

[ceo]

Lee wrote:
> Why is that?  What advantages are there to writing the game logic in a
> scripting language versus writing it in the same language as the kernel.  If
> all things else are equal, I would prefer to write the game logic in the
> language I know best which is the language of my kernel.  Would anyone be
> willing to compare the two?

IBM (and others) did many studies on programmer efficiency in different 
languages. One of the results was that the number of KLOC (thousands of 
lines of code) each programmer specified, coded, tested, debugged, and 
deployed in unit time (usually measured per year, IIRC) was 
approximately constant *independent* of language used.

(another result was that different programmers' KLOC counts varied by a 
factor of up to 40, IIRC?)

So, really, the question ever since has been "Why the heck should you 
*ever* program in a system language?".

The general consensus is that game-logic (especially in a MUD) does not 
have requirements that dictate a systems language. Some people even 
argue that MUD game-logic doesn't even benefit from OO; I can certainly 
see some strong arguments for this, usually involving substituting 
Aspect-Oriented or similar for OO. Game-data for MUD's (and MMOG's) 
certainly doesn't fit naturally into the OO paradigm (unless you have a 
rather boring MUD, or one that never changes over time).

Adam