@MiniDigger At the moment I envision the project to be similar to my Webmaker tools project ( https://playingwithsid.blogspot.com/2015/07/mozilla-webmaker-tools-on-raspberry-pi.html )
@MiniDigger Kids could connect to RaspberryPi by downloading the client from the server. The clients could either LAN computers in a computer lab or any mobile tablets/mobile phones
i made simple lib with typescript for ScriptCraft
example warps plugin: https://github.com/runbb/scriptcraft-typescript/blob/master/warps.ts
and use es6 in scriptcraft
Oh it just transpiles?
Hey all. Got 1.11.2 (Spigot). Runs fine, has for ages. Installed ScriptCraft. It installed fine. the "js 1 + 1" test works fine. Trying to get the ScratchMC (https://github.com/mpatrascu/ScratchMC/) to work for the kids. I started it with node and node seems to be responding. I put the scratch.js file in plugins/scriptcraft directory. But whenever I run command from ScratchMC, I get something like: [13:50:25 ERROR]: [scriptcraft] Error while trying to evaluate javascript: scratch("reset_all","192.168.2.245"), Error: javax.script.ScriptException: ReferenceError: "scratch" is not defined in <eval> at line number 1. The "reset_all" could be any function. I opened scratch.js and it looks like scratch() is defined. What am I missing? What can I try?
I gave that whole folder 777 and even tried running everything as root. Still no good.
Ok, nevermind.... it was pathing problem. Personally, and maybe I am just dumb, the phrase "This is a simple mod in a file called greet.js in the scriptcraft/plugins directory" in the docs, made me think the <server_dir>/plugins/scriptcraft/plugins directory, as most plugins are contained in their own directory. But is is a new, top level directory, so that threw me off. Maybe a small change to the docs to clarify?
Anyway, thanks for the great mod.
box( blocks.chest + ':' + Drone.PLAYER_SIGN_FACING[(drone.dir + 2) % 4])
I change the "drone.dir + 2" and get every direction but up???
Hey everyone, just posting a ping here. The new ScriptCraftJS site was looking great but I had to take some time off from development. There are a lot of features on the site, requiring a lot of testing, and I ran out of time. I've recently updated the site and will be testing again soon. Info will be posted here and in the Google Group to invite people to beat up the site development environment before it's proposed to replace Walter's site.
and markdown
is best
Update: I've been going through the code in detail, updating the doc notes in-code, adding a few code comments, and doing some other minor tidying-up. I'll send a PR for @walterhiggins. With this little kick start maybe we can get a regular series of updates flowing to address issues reported, and get the plugin up to MC 1.12. BTW, I've built with 1.12 and it's no problem at all. The new website effort effort got delayed but all of the components are in place and I'm just trying to beat it up so that we can invite folks for comment. It's slow moving, but hey, it's FOSS.
Yes. If you open the scriptcraft.jar, you'll see that there is a boot.js file in there. However, like adding code into any other plugin it's probably not a good idea to do injection like this. ScriptCraftJS already has the plugins folder for exactly this purpose. From the doc:
At server startup the ScriptCraft Java plugin is loaded and begins automatically
loading and executing all of the modules (javascript files with the extension .js)
it finds in the scriptcraft/plugins directory".
Any help?
That's an interesting concept but why not require ScriptCraft as a pre-requisite, like other plugins require Vault or MultiVerse Core? Then add your code into the plugins directory. That allows your plugin to benefit from updates to ScriptCraft rather than you needing to update your plugin to accommodate changes here. I understand your desire to publish something with your name on it. But in the FOSS world where we Intend for components to interact, for people to be able to share code, for better code re-usability, and for better transparency, in This world the model doesn't agree with that "it all came from here" concept.
The new website has a marketplace where you will be able to publish your plugins in exactly that way. People will be able to rate and comment your plugins. And you can update them there in the repo just like Bukket plugins.
So I encourage you to work with the model as it is, and become a leader in this new marketplace as we try to extend the scope of ScriptCraft and get more people to use and develop with it.
Ok, just thought maybe we could make Scriptcraft plugins more competitive by allowing an optional compilation, like it would be the ultimate reason every bukkit plugin developer would like to build their plugins on ScriptCraft, since it's faster and easier.
I've been exploiting Scriptcraft since I discovered it just to keep promoting it. For example in this repo: https://github.com/jordigoyanes/LandProtect where I have a cool scriptcraft plugin that allows players to own their land using scriptcraft's integrated json database, there's a readme promoting the use of both JavaScript and ScriptScraft.
I've been exploiting Scriptcraft since I discovered it just to keep promoting it. For example in this repo: https://github.com/jordigoyanes/LandProtect where I have a cool scriptcraft plugin that allows players to own their land using scriptcraft's integrated json database, there's a readme promoting the use of both JavaScript and ScriptScraft.
That's great but I don't see a good case for making it more difficult for a consumer of your plugin to use or modify it. If they get another ScriptCraft plugin they'll need to get a completely new instance of ScriptCraft. Not only is that not performant but it simply won't work with the default package. Your intent to make it easy has many other consequences .... and it's already easy. So just publish your script, don't bundle with the core. That's a violation of protocol for every core/plugin technology out there.
How would you feel if you needed a different server component like Spigot every time you wanted to use a plugin, because every plugin had a custom version of Spigot built-in? That would leave you with the ability to use just one plugin because others couldn't be added into that package. And that's exactly the same scenario when JS plugins are added into a JAR with ScriptCraft.
So I'm really hoping that you'll see that every angle of this is not in agreement with what you want to do, that technically it won't work when a site wants to use anything other than your plugins, and that it's all completely unnecessary. There is no good social, business, or technical case for what you're doing. But I really do hope you add your LandProtect plugin to the SC repo when it goes live!
not trying to violate anything, it's just that there are some newbies who just know how to copy and paste .jar files in their server and have no intention to poke around scripcraft or java or javascript or anything. It could just work like .jar file that decompresses several .js files including your plugin file, making things work out of the box for those newbies.
And I recognize that you're trying to do something good here, so nothing else implied... :)
I have the code in front of me. I'm looking at the source and a JAR that I just built ... it's already all self-contained, with documentation and the ability for developers and gamers to use it as intended.
But that level of sophistication doesn't even need to be bundled with ScriptCraft. Why not have SC as a dependency and someone can create a separate JAR/plugin that installs what they need into the folders prepared by SC? Then the site can update SC without relying on the plugin author (assuming no breaking changes) and the site can still use other plugins.
How about a compromise... So far your plugin has less than 200 lines in a single .js file. That fits well within SC as currently defined. If your project expands well beyond that, then maybe we should discuss "extended usage". Right now I see your plugin as possibly being one of the first to kickstart a new SC ecosystem. Please don't spoil that by completely isolating your plugin in a way that makes people choose between your one plugin and the rest of the ecosystem. I'm sure you don't want that.
btw my plugin is just an example xD not a big deal
Now I'll go to sleep because it's 1:49am in Spain
Awesome. But right now you could offer a plugin at Spigot, advertised as "requires ScriptCraft" with installation instructions that say something like "Add these scripts into plugins, these into modules, and type /reload". That's not tough at all, and far easier than, for example, plugins that require a new launcher.
kk, gnite!