[vworld-tech] MUD codebases

[Richard]

> From: Mirjam Eladhari
> Sent: Friday, 27 August 2004 4:14 p.m.
> 
> I'm looking for a text based MUD codebase suitable for 
> testing stuff in.
> But there are so many of them and I'm afraid of: 1 ending up 
> trying one
> after another/ 2 spending huge amounts of time staring at
> specifications/3. getting really deep into one just to realize I chose
> the wrong codebase just because I didn't ask anyone first. 

I don't think it really matters so much which one you choose as long
as you are comfortable with it.  Most that I have seen are pretty much
the same, and none have the features I want from a mudlib.  Anytime I
have had the energy to work on my pet mud project, I have used custom
mudlibs.

What I would do if I were you, would be to try out the candidates, or
the most used ones from amongst them, and pick the one that suits your
needs that way.

For me, most of the effort in development comes from working out where
I want to go and how to get there.  Taking what I had done at any
given time and translating it to another codebase would be much easier
in comparison.

I haven't read Bartle's book, find most of your criteria too vague
and prefer codebase with scripting languages, so I can't really suggest
any codebases that might suit you.  Personally, I prefer readability
of code and am most familiar with Python using Stackless Python, so
thats what we use for a codebase for our experiments.

Anyway, sorry I couldn't help more,
Richard.