common common functions ;-)

[mojoaxel]

In #548 (comment) it was decided to have a (minimal) set of common IO-functions so those don't need to be re-implemented in every game.

I propose we use the same function (same names) in every programming language (as far as possible!)

That way the code get's easier to read and compare.

What do you think?

[mojoaxel]

To stay close to the original BASIC implementation I would propose the following functions (pseudo language)

• writeLine(...messages) - Writes content to the terminal and finishes with a linebrank.
• async input(message) - prints out the message followed by a space and waits for an user input.
  The promise is resolved on enter. The result is a string without a newline at the end.

In addition it could be useful to have the following functions:

• write(...messages) - Writes content to the terminal without a newline at the end.
• tab(length) - returns a string with the given length containing only of spaces
• random(max, min=0) - Returns random integer number [min...max].

[coding-horror]

yes! I think this is perfect. Just the minimum viable set of common functions, justified by at least 10 (ish) of the programs needing them..?

[ugurkupeli]

I have published a utility crate for rust users.
Currently there are only functions for printing intro/instructions and different types of user prompts - but I think that is good for our purpose.

[drewjcooper]

See the common library for .Net at 00_Common/dotnet for my rationale and implementation of this idea.

I like the idea of having a set of functions with names/signatures that are typical of the language's standard library, but provide the behaviour of the BASIC interpreter.

I don't like the idea of creating a DSL that looks like BASIC. Hence, I have not implemented a Tab(int) function in the .Net common library, or any of my game ports, preferring to stick to C#/.Net idioms.

[coding-horror]

What @mojoaxel said ;) .. "stay close to the original implementation"