So I have this idea and want to test it out (Python environment) but ...

[nice90sguy]

The guy who started the company I'm working for is very smart, but a non-techy. For many years he's relied on me and others to build prototypes for him using our coding chops. He's just built a very full-featured, cool looking website with a PostgreSQL backend, plus a really good working prototype of a system that has multiple Dockerized services. It took him three weeks to do all that on his own.
It's a new world with Copilot.

I've always been used to my technical skills becoming redundant, and spent (wasted) much of my time keeping up with changes. I can finally focus on pure design and ideas, and leave all that to someone/something else.

Of course "ChatGPT can make mistakes". But so can everyone. It's not great at overall structure, but it produces working code every time (although the code may not do exactly what I want, or do it in the most elegant way).

So, for prototyping, proof of concept, or "cobbling together" stuff, copilots are just great. And they're getting better. Today, during my lunchbreak, I got ChatGPT to write a DSL (domain specific language) and a Pthon-based transpiler to produce... a story game I've started writing . I can concentrate on the story and what I want to happen, and ignore implemementation details. It will probably produce very inefficent Ink code, but neither readers or I will care.

 

[YmaOHyd]

THAT. FUCKING. TOOTHBRUSH. THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING ABOUT CITADEL.

"Now you're talking. Waiter! Space diva needs more wine!"

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Is it a 12in python? I here there are a lot of those on lit.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Of course "ChatGPT can make mistakes". But so can everyone. It's not great at overall structure, but it produces working code every time (although the code may not do exactly what I want, or do it in the most elegant way).

What counts as "working"? (non-snark, genuine question)

 

[nice90sguy]

What counts as "working"? (non-snark, genuine question)

This usually happens when I'm not clear enough about the spec: An example (not a real one) would be - "list these users by age, then by name", and it prints out two lists, one sorted by age, and the second one by name. But the code runs first time, nearly every time - I usually paste it into my IDE and execute it (after giving it a once over).

 

[SebastianHolt]

Say more. What kinds of programmatic effects do you imagine, and how would they improve the story experience, and what does "robust" mean here?

In time, with the help of A.I., books will become movies, and one will be able to plug into the movie somehow. Question will be ... like today's world with controls from an Xbox with voice recognition (voice would be used to direct the character), with awkward glasses (vr helmet), where with gloves and voice, one can direct the story.

hum

 

[SebastianHolt]

Okay, who wants to share their Erotica github account? I'm snarkyslut420

what is that? I'm so out of touch with technology these days

 

[SebastianHolt]

If you haven't used a compiler since Borland, you might want to check out Lazarus, which is a free clone of Delphi. There's also freepascal that is a TP clone, complete with a character mode (i.e., DOS) IDE.

I'm sure there are IDEs for Python but they won't be like Borland's IDE...

BTW, I'd dying to know why you think a compiler will "tie in" to an erotic story, and I'm more than a little concerned that it won't work. But I'll clap the loudest if I'm wrong...

Another alarm bell that rang is that there's an explicit rule against AI and it's interpreted with "against" applied very stringently and "AI" applied very broadly. If "tie in" means any part of the story is created by the code, I'm sure it would be considered to violate this rule.

my thought or goal was to create a more interactive story/experience. I grew up with Borland and could crank out code pretty quickly. the compiler has nothing to do with the story other than the 'tool' creating a tighter, more interactive experience with more user choices

 

[TheRedLantern]

what is that? I'm so out of touch with technology these days

It's a place you can store source code: https://github.com/

It's a source control system, and it's as close to an industry standard today as you're going to find.

I was joking because many of us signed up for gmail accounts for the google docs for our writing, and I was saying that I'm drawing the line there and not going to try to publish code as TheRedLantern.

my thought or goal was to create a more interactive story/experience. I grew up with Borland and could crank out code pretty quickly. the compiler has nothing to do with the story other than the 'tool' creating a tighter, more interactive experience with more user choices

You may want to check out "Inkle." It's free & open source, and the site can run it natively. It's for exactly what you're describing. Check out the "Story Games" forum.

 

[Britva415]

Is it a 12in python? I here there are a lot of those on lit.

The 3 in Python3 stands for decimeters

 

[Kelliezgirl]

The 3 in Python3 stands for decimeters

It all makes sense now....

 

[darwin1859]

my thought or goal was to create a more interactive story/experience. I grew up with Borland and could crank out code pretty quickly. the compiler has nothing to do with the story other than the 'tool' creating a tighter, more interactive experience with more user choices

Ah. I never used it, but I think Literotica has a "choose your own adventure" feature so you don't need to break out a compiler. See here and here

Also there's no need to re-invent that wheel. I have used TADS (text adventure design system) and looked at Inform to create IF (and AGT, a very long time ago). These systems have many advantages. For example, they have many players for end-users on a variety of platforms (I just installed Gargoyle on Fedora 43). Few readers will install your binary to read/play your IF work. These systems also have extensive object libraries to make writing a game easier (like defining a door, or a noun). You just need to pick the correct object from the library, override things like a description and a location, and instantiate it and "poof!" you have a Skull or a door or a computer keyboard that users can type on. Or a "room" with connections to other rooms. And you can define custom methods to handle special effects (e.g., a secret message that self-destructs a couple turns after being opened). And the language parser is inbuilt (and customizable to some degrees). You'll have a work playable in minutes, rather than days/weeks/months.

But if you've used a compiler, all of these will be familiar. They are "desktop-first" (like the old Infocom games). But I think these days the "real action" is to have your work available online, so the LE feature is attractive from that POV. I have tried Twine, it's "browser-first." I think I found it limiting compared to something like Inform or TADS.

Also, interest in purely text IF has waned in favor of graphical versions...

But I re-invent wheels for fun all the time. Don't let me stop you... If our roles were reversed and I were seeing this, I'd take a look at the "knot" format of the the LE 3RD gen IF, vomit a little in my throat, and set about creating an authoring tool that let's me write IF more like TADS or Inform, and then renders a "knot" file for LE. Because I cannot imagine debugging a few thousand lines of syntax that make Perl look elegant. Maybe someone's already done this...

 

[cw5523729]

Also there's no need to re-invent that wheel. I have used TADS (text adventure design system) and looked at Inform to create IF (and AGT, a very long time ago).

Pretty sure i still have a version of AGT buried on my desktop somewhere 5 or 6 layers of folders deep named "old desktop copy"