teteyal
|
  |
| Joined: 01 May 2011 |
| Total Posts: 274 |
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 01:21 PM |
Instance.new("Part"); Instance.new("Part",Workspace); Instance.new("Part",Workspace,"Brick");
The third argument should be what the object will be named as. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 01:21 PM |
I agree. But it really is just completely unnecessary.
Also, does anyone know when exactly the second argument was added? Was it always there and just no one knew? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 01:23 PM |
Idk. I found out about the second argument a month ago, along with how 'Workspace' by itself doesn't need a capital.
~You just lost the game. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
teteyal
|
  |
| Joined: 01 May 2011 |
| Total Posts: 274 |
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 01:26 PM |
@blue
Well it can make things easier though instead of making that Instance()'d object a variable and making another statement saying what the name of it is. And I have no idea when it was added.
@ap
Same, I found it about 3-4 months ago. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 01:28 PM |
we need third argument like dis
Instance.new("Part",blah,{Name = "Bob",Transparency = .5}) |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Luc599345
|
  |
| Joined: 25 Jul 2008 |
| Total Posts: 1169 |
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 01:30 PM |
@su8
Yes. Totally. Seriously. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
teteyal
|
  |
| Joined: 01 May 2011 |
| Total Posts: 274 |
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 01:30 PM |
Eh..
I've also thought that there should be a "Touching" event, where while an object is touching the object, it will execute its function. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Luc599345
|
  |
| Joined: 25 Jul 2008 |
| Total Posts: 1169 |
|
| |
|
teteyal
|
  |
| Joined: 01 May 2011 |
| Total Posts: 274 |
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 01:34 PM |
| Why not? I want to do things like having my own "water" object, instead of that ROBLOX terrain version, and I want to create an underwater GUI effect and stuff. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 01:35 PM |
or
part:Intersects(otherpart) |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 01:38 PM |
is this
Instance.new("Part", Workspace).Name = "Brick"
Really that hard? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Legend26
|
  |
| Joined: 08 Sep 2008 |
| Total Posts: 10586 |
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 01:39 PM |
| It's been there at LEAST since August 10, 2010 although it could very well have been there since the beginning of time for all we know. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
teteyal
|
  |
| Joined: 01 May 2011 |
| Total Posts: 274 |
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 01:41 PM |
@tech
Ewww.. more characters to type in. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 01:42 PM |
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as new(), is in fact, Instance.new(), or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, Instance plus new(). new() is not a function unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning Instance system made useful by the Instance metatables, Roblox classes and vital system components comprising a full function.
Many computer users run a modified version of the Instance system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of Instance which is widely used today is often called “new()”, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the Instance system, developed by the Instance Project.
There really is a new(), and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. new() is the member: the function in the object that allocates the machine’s resources to the other scripts that you run. The new() is an essential part of an Instance, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete Instance object. new() is normally used in combination with the Instance object: the whole function is basically Instance with new() added, or Instance.new(). All the so-called “new()” distributions are really distributions of Instance.new(). |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 01:43 PM |
| will you shut up ignorant spammer who can't script |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
TheMyrco
|
  |
| Joined: 13 Aug 2011 |
| Total Posts: 15105 |
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 01:47 PM |
| This belongs in Suggestion and Ideas, thanks for understanding. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
stravant
|
  |
 |
| Joined: 22 Oct 2007 |
| Total Posts: 2893 |
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 02:12 PM |
Or you could use my Create function if you want more control:
local RbxUtility = LoadLibrary('RbxUtility') local Create = RbxUtility.Create
local part = Create'Part'{ Parent = game.Workspace; Name = 'Blah Part'; BrickColor = BrickColor.new(21); }
It's even in RbxUtility so you'll always have it at you fingertips. Adding more arguments to Instance.new is just API bloat, I would lobby against it. I even dislike it having a parent argument. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 02:48 PM |
| @stravant Wait, I'm pretty sure that the roblox gameservers load that on startup =O |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
SN0X
|
  |
| Joined: 24 Oct 2011 |
| Total Posts: 7277 |
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 02:58 PM |
Nah, well sure, that works too, but a simpler way would be what su8 suggested. in fact, keep the 2 arguments, but if the 2nd argument is not a table, but an object, then it is set to the new object's part
otherwise,
Instance.new(String Objectclassname, {properties})
like
Instance.new("Textlabel",{Parent = Game.Players.SN0X.PlayerGui.ScreenGui, Size = UDim2.new(1,0,1,0), Text = "TROLOLLOLOLOLOL", BackgroundColor3 = Color3.new(255,255,255), TextScaled = true} )
That would be AWSUMMM :DDDDD |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 03:08 PM |
Instance.new("Brick,{Parent = game.Workspace, Name = "Hello", etc.}
☜▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬☜☆☞▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬☞ - Candymaniac, a highly reactive substance. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
SN0X
|
  |
| Joined: 24 Oct 2011 |
| Total Posts: 7277 |
|
| |
|
stravant
|
  |
 |
| Joined: 22 Oct 2007 |
| Total Posts: 2893 |
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 03:10 PM |
Note that my solution also handles children. You can build a whole hierarchy with it:
Create'Model'{ Name = 'Thing'; Create'Part'{ Name = 'SomePart'; Create'SpecialMesh'{ MeshId = '...'; }; }; }
Very succinct way of stating and building a hierarchy in code. Putting that into the core API is too much of a stretch though, the API should provide just what's needed, not a lot of sugar like that, which should go into the libraries instead. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
SN0X
|
  |
| Joined: 24 Oct 2011 |
| Total Posts: 7277 |
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 03:22 PM |
>Putting that into the core API is too much of a stretch though, the API should provide just what's needed, not a lot of sugar like that, which should go into the libraries instead.
I disagree...in my oppinion, development here in ROBLOX should be as easy, quick and comfertable as possible.
But yeah, that's pretty neat. Still long and library-yy though. PUT IT IN INSTANCE.NEW() PL0X! |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
stravant
|
  |
 |
| Joined: 22 Oct 2007 |
| Total Posts: 2893 |
|
|
| 22 Aug 2012 03:26 PM |
"development here in ROBLOX should be as easy, quick and comfertable as possible."
Yes, and stuff like what I posted should be implemented Lua side, as libraries, not in the C API (Where it would probably even be slower than if made on the Lua side due to the extra interop costs).
If you could just say LoadLibrary('RbxUtility').ImportAll() and have all those nice things that would be much better than having them in the C API. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|