OSSL is intended to be a superset of LSL, so should generally be simple to
support without impact to the LSL support. In addition to the minor syntax
difference (statements may not be parenthesized), I have several suggestions:
1. LSLForge obviously lacks templates for os* library functions. Rather than
simply adding them to LSLForge, it might be a good idea to add a preference,
possibly as a project parameter, pragma or file name pattern.
2. OSSL allows library functions to have multiple argument patterns. For
instance, osTeleportAgent has three syntactically distinct forms (see
http://opensimulator.org/wiki/OsTeleportAgent )
3. it would be nice to have .osslp/.osslm/.ossl file extensions supported, both
to distinguish them in your version control and deployment system and perhaps
as a way to enable ossl extensions.
we could, of course, fork development to produce an osslforge, but it feels to
me like a bad idea.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by mth...@gmail.com on 9 Oct 2014 at 1:50
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
mth...@gmail.comon 9 Oct 2014 at 1:50