2 ms·
Yeah, I also got heavily invested in tt++ scripts but never fully automated. It was great back in the day but there were definitely some eccentricities that mad
by pimlottc 6y ago
Yeah, I also got heavily invested in tt++ scripts but never fully automated. It was great back in the day but there were definitely some eccentricities that made advanced difficult - lack of proper lists, awkwardness dealing with empty strings, weird scoping and special variables, no dicts.
I recently dusted off my old files and tried to get it running in the latest version but there were so many breaking changes that I just gave up trying to fix it.
It would be fun to try to make a proper fully automated bot, though as you said, there are so many different contexts and possible text prompts itd be difficult to make it truly reliable. I wonder what the best approach would be - some kind of classic AI goal system or newfangled ML?
(If I had the time to start over, I’d probably use Mudlet since it uses a proper scripting (lua) instead of something that got hacked together over time. Though it’s a bit GUI-reliant for my tastes)
- pmiller2 6y agoYeah, tt++'s programming model is essentially a finite state machine with a single global scope. If that sounds hard to work with, it is. I think if I were starting over, I'd go with a client that's extensible in a real language, whether that be Lua, Python, Ruby, Scheme, elisp, etc., simply so I could take advantage of modern programming language features.