Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Review current file path/import requirements for archetypes -- Determine what needs to change for single-file instantiation to work #48

Open
ImmutableOctet opened this issue Nov 23, 2022 · 0 comments
Assignees
Labels
Feature New feature or request Good practice Indicates a proposed change that would be seen as good practice module: engine For features that involve the `engine` module. (optional)

Comments

@ImmutableOctet
Copy link
Owner

ImmutableOctet commented Nov 23, 2022

We currently assume filesystem access when processing archetypes. This means we always expect imports and state references to be the proper method of entity-descriptor construction. In a theoretical scenario where we would want to embed all logic data of an entity in a single file, this would not be sufficient.

Take for example an entity description sent to a game client from a server. In this example, we would need to send multiple files from the server in order to construct a single entity factory and descriptor. This becomes wildly inefficient compared to a single (possibly space-optimized) JSON object or string stored in memory.

@ImmutableOctet ImmutableOctet added Feature New feature or request Good practice Indicates a proposed change that would be seen as good practice module: engine For features that involve the `engine` module. (optional) labels Nov 23, 2022
@ImmutableOctet ImmutableOctet self-assigned this Nov 23, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Feature New feature or request Good practice Indicates a proposed change that would be seen as good practice module: engine For features that involve the `engine` module. (optional)
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant