12/5/2023 0 Comments Parsec swtor parser![]() I'd love it if BW put one in, just for people's own sake. My policy is if I join a HM OP (other than EV/KP) and Starparse isn't used, I'll give it two wipes (Starparse also has a death recap, which is ridiculously useful) otherwise I'm out. I pretty much only care about dps numbers when lack of DPS causes a wipe (usually to enrage, or another mechanic that requires good enough dps). Honestly, I don't even care too much about this. The only time someone should be called on their dps is when the spam basic attk and wont even take peoples advice on how to do even the basic rotation. Edited Augby with starparse you can do an OPs group, where everyone sees everyones dps, so there are still ******es that use that to degrade people. the negative effects of DPS spammers/braggers/shamers are largely absent in SWTOR. since you cannot easily spam DPS results in game. you can log your combat in SWTOR and then go outside the game and use a 3rd party webapp to actually record and analyze your own DPS and use it for refining your rotations. to help the main tank and healer with damage management). even if they were not doing everything their class should be doing (like CC or kiting, etc. It was also an epeen thing for some players to constantly brag about their DPS. and some would in fact use it to shame other players (in chat) about their DPS numbers. which allows MODs (including DPS meters) it became a thing for some players to spam DPS results for a group during each step in a group encounter. the core issue is DPS spammers in group chat during an FP or OP. I'm a little slow, so could you elaborate more please?Īctually. Be weird to spam Gen Chat "Hey everyone, I just got a XXXX DPS on a Flashpoint" I have the overlay up all the time and see my DPS everyday. I know SWG had a DPS meter ingame that I only seen, pretty much the same premise as the Starparse overlay that I use in Swtor. (This particular definition of item returns either an empty list of zero parses, indicating no parse is possible, or a singleton list of precisely one parse, indicating the parse was successful.Not sure about your meaning here. Ultimately, it returns zero or more such possible parses. That is, item's type is that of a parser that accepts an input String and attempts to parse the beginning of the input to generate a Char value, plus the remainder of the String after the portion that was parsed. The type Parser Char is equivalent to the type: String -> ![]() Using the final version of this Parser type alias: type Parser a = String -> This defines a type alias Parser that is parameterized, meaning that Parser itself is not a complete type, but rather Parser Tree or Parser Char or Parser Double is a complete type, representing a parser that parses a Tree, Char, or Double. ![]() The author goes on to refine the Parser type, pointing out that (1) parsers may not use all of their input and so should return (Tree, String) and not just Tree, (2) they may be able to parse their input in multiple ways (most importantly in "zero" ways, if the input cannot be parsed) and so should return a list of possible parse results, and (3) may need to parse something other than a Tree and so ought to be generalized to parse input into an arbitrary type: type Parser a = String -> The intention is not to define such a point but rather to describe the type of points by means of a type alias Point that is defined to be equivalent to the type (Double, Double) of pairs of floating point numbers. MyTreeParser _ = error "Parser only supports the program '2*3+4'"Ĭonsider the similar statement: "In a language supporting algebraic data types such as Haskell, points can natually be represented as pairs of floating point numbers: type Point = (Double, Double). That is, after defining the type alias Parser using: type Parser = String -> TreeĪn actual parser could be declared to have type Parser (equivalent to type String -> Tree) like so: - here is a very bad parser capable of parsing only one possible program ![]() What the author means by this is that parsers are functions, and the type of such a parser function might be the type Parser, which the author has defined as a type alias for the type String -> Tree. A parser is a function that takes a string In a functional language such as Haskell, parsers can naturally be viewed as functions. I assume you are looking at this slide deck.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |