Author Topic: Requirement ID naming convention  (Read 207 times)

Offline Maddremor

  • Zombie Food
  • *
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
Requirement ID naming convention
« on: July 31, 2017, 09:00:34 AM »
I'm looking at adding more requirement lists to the game. However, there is no current ID naming convention to differentiate reqs from singular items, and I feel that that could lead to confusion down the road. Would a suffix in the ID, such as something_type, something_like, or something_req be suitable for a item requirement list?

Online Kevin Granade

  • Administrator
  • Survivor
  • *****
  • Posts: 5588
  • I code dead people.
    • View Profile
Re: Requirement ID naming convention
« Reply #1 on: August 01, 2017, 02:37:45 AM »
They're already typed values, both in json and in the game code.  Naming scenes are fragile and a pain to maintain.
Its like a fun family cookout, except your family is burning in flames while trying to eat you. -secretfire
I'm more excited than a survivor on meth and toast'ems. -Nighthawk
The the giant wasp is slammed through the zombie brute!

Offline Coolthulhu

  • Contributor
  • Survivor
  • ****
  • Posts: 3839
    • View Profile
Re: Requirement ID naming convention
« Reply #2 on: August 01, 2017, 03:04:53 AM »
They're currently set apart by their inclusion method.
Similar to how item groups and individual items are applied with different tag ("item" vs "group").

Offline Maddremor

  • Zombie Food
  • *
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
Re: Requirement ID naming convention
« Reply #3 on: August 01, 2017, 10:42:35 AM »
To clarify, I don't propose making the reqs. ID semantic (codewise), rather sidestep getting a thesaurus to come up with good ID names. For example, nail_req being nail-like things instead of trying to find a good, unused synonym for nail.