Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chiran
Just two things I noticed at a glance. After the last recipe in a Tier, there's no need for , after } (might actually cause a parsing error, not sure). Also, I would probably do it so that the recipe count starts at 0 for each Tier. Could also use integer keys as recipe identifiers, so [1] instead of ["Recipe1"]. I'm just a bit nervous about that because of some localization issues but it should work as long as this file would only be read, not written to.
-Chiran
|
Not sure if those changes "NEED" to be in place, but here is a copy of it with those changes.
When you said about integer keys for the recipe numbers, I can see using that. But just 1 question..
if there was 10 recipes per crafting tier, and there is a total of 2 tiers, would the recipies numbers still be 0-18 going by the TypeOfCrafting, or would it be better to go with TierDependent, being 0-9 for tier1, 0-9 for tier2 ? (did that make any since, because i just gave myself a headack typing it.. lol)
EDIT:
oh, also, I was just thinking (from a programing word, unfimilar with lau).
If it's seting up variables, i assumes that's easier for coding, but when happens when there is a newer LAU code with newer recipes that comes out. If the Lau code is simply referencing the integer to pull the data, I could see issues with that because Number120 recipe might not be the same 120 in a newer recipe list. Unless there is something with LAU that i'm not aware of being able to loop back and reference different data for confirmation. But again, even with "Recipe1", "Recipe2" ,etc .. ya really have the same issue I guess, as it's just an incrimenting number. ohh well, we will have to see what others come up with.