A suggestion regarding the disparity of cache-nocache compile times
First let me say i truly love the Cache feature.
My problem is that i do not run a server myself, only test scripts.
So all i can really do is admire it's function from afar..
Every single time i make even the smallest change to a script, the entire \Scripts folder needs to re-compile.
I think I might have thought of a wonderful solution to shorten load times for scriptors.
Add a \Workbench (whatever name) folder to the root RunUO folder that compiles at runtime just like the \Scripts folder does. This folder does not get included into the cache (or is cached seperately).
This way, the Scripts.dll cache will be unmodified and the server will not have to recompile all those scripts if they havent changed...(very quick load)
The scripts in the "Workbench" folder will be few, just the ones currently being modified/created and therefore compile time is reduced.
When the script is ready, it can be moved to the custom folder in scripts just like is done now to be added to the next cache.
Thoughts?
First let me say i truly love the Cache feature.
My problem is that i do not run a server myself, only test scripts.
So all i can really do is admire it's function from afar..
Every single time i make even the smallest change to a script, the entire \Scripts folder needs to re-compile.
I think I might have thought of a wonderful solution to shorten load times for scriptors.
Add a \Workbench (whatever name) folder to the root RunUO folder that compiles at runtime just like the \Scripts folder does. This folder does not get included into the cache (or is cached seperately).
This way, the Scripts.dll cache will be unmodified and the server will not have to recompile all those scripts if they havent changed...(very quick load)
The scripts in the "Workbench" folder will be few, just the ones currently being modified/created and therefore compile time is reduced.
When the script is ready, it can be moved to the custom folder in scripts just like is done now to be added to the next cache.
Thoughts?