Jump to content


Community Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Teiresias last won the day on January 8 2015

Teiresias had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

11 Good

About Teiresias

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

550 profile views
  1. Hi stanislas69, i have already tried introducing JsDoc some time ago with focus on the AIs and we had a discussion about it (see https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/19488-proposal-enhance-common-api-with-documentation/). At that time a big obstacle discovered was that JsDoc used a different JavaScript interpreter than 0AD itself: Rhino vs. SpiderMonkey. I don't know whether this has changed by now, but at that time it seemed like the 0AD JavaScript code was compatible only with 0AD itself, as SpiderMonkey seems to be the spearhead of JS development. Any separate tool using a different analyzer may introduce troubles. Quoting mimo: If it has JS compatibility issues which prevent us from using some JS features that we would want to use, that's a very strong point against its use. What is your concept for handling this problem? (Sorry for the less-than-optimal layout - my browser has severe problems with the new forum editor which i have not resolved yet).
  2. Sorry - posted into wrong thread. Discussion is continued here: https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/20728-jsdoc-documentation
  3. The question of getting involved with AI development comes up from time to time. General consensus seems to be that indeed you start by digging through the sources and modify the existant bot to your needs. You say you "need to do a BIG BIG work with AI" - is this a master thesis or similar? If so, i suggest to check with your mentor before starting: The AI API is not stable and requires adjustment of the bot script code from time to time. See here. If you are doing a thesis work with a deadline, it may be advisable to check out and freeze a specific revision to prevent your module from getting broken at an undesirable time. Will your work have to become part of the official code base to be accepted in studies? If so, approach #1 is probably not feasible.Regarding the non-existant documentation, this has been discussed before - and it seems consensus that the difficulties caused by having to "read the code" are neglectible compared to building up your own concepts. The ultimate goal of an AI is to give the user (player) a challenging and fun experience. This is more of passing the turing test than building algorithms/structures. Besides the tutorial already mentioned, additional information may be gathered in the forums by searching for "AI", "petra", "aegis", "jubot" etc.
  4. lexa: JuKu96 has created a tutorial on bot development some time ago. Additionally, you may check the forum topics tagged "AI", but afaik not all relevant threads have been tagged. Seconding sanderd17, the AIs of 0AD evolved gradually from the ancient "testbot". It was implemented as a demo by the one who implemented the original AI interface into the engine. To quote sanderd17 from #0ad: 21:52 < sanderd17_> The first AI was only meant as a test IIRC, but sadly, it kept growing bigger, until it became a monster. Friendly spoken, the AI is not designed but grown. So, there seem only few high-level designs/planning documents available. I doubt the AI<->engine concept will be changed at a whole in the forseeable future, but i recommend you to practice some hours on your own before giving the event. Regarding your planning, two times two hours might prove a bit short in time. You might want to chat to mimo about a good "place to enter". Another option is to fetch a copy of testbot/jubot from an earlier SVN version and adapt it to the new API, to use as a "drosophila".
  5. I think there are two fundamental improvements in your concept: Regarding performance, the event-driven approach is probably far superior to any polling system based on entity collections, as supplied with the current API. If driven far enough, maybe you could do away with the BaseAI.handleMessage() alltogether. IIRC that function has been identified as a performance dropper in some forum discussions. Your DSL nicely abstracts off the tedious details of reading templates, isolating entities etc., which tend to clutter up the JavaScript code of the current bots (including mine).Generally, your DSL and event system implement an expert system somewhat similar to what was used in AoK, but at an entity-level granularity. This is probably more suited to defining intelligent behavior than pure JS. Looks promising! PS. I meant SDK=Software Development Kit. I was not sure whether you will provide a complete set of scripts or whether Hannibal is just the pure "script runtime".
  6. I think av93's question shows an interesting point, which seemed swinging along "under the hood" of many AI-bot related discussions: Shall we concentrate all efforts on one - *THE* - 0AD bot for extraordinary quality and glory, or are we going to look at/for a zoo of different bots and concepts, so the best concepts will eventually evolve? Personally i tend for the second option, but there seem quite some people in favor of the first one. @agentx: In your initial post, you state "because this what this bot is all about.". I get the impression Hannibal is more of a new "AI-bot SDK", than a bot. In your second post you say "Depends on the group script author. He/she may use:...". So will the bot behavior be hand-coded, or are you going to infer the group scripts from the triple store?
  7. at l(e)ast we have a larger discussion group now... I will try and answer all points of the previous comments: @feneur,mimo: I have choosen JsDoc because it seemed the best "Doxygen for JavaScript" tool available - there are not too many of them anyway. Of course, this concept introduces the dependency on the source code, and I had to learn the JS language changes much faster than do traditional programming languages. So this approach has its drawbacks. But, in my experience, a src->doc tool raises the chances of docs and src staying in sync, as both are "closer to each other". Separate documents tend to get neglected when the sources are updated, unless you have strict QA enforced. I even tend to write my designs into class/namespace overviews. @niektb,mimo: "struggled with basic tasks": I got a taste of it on my own today: In an attempt to write a quick-and-dirty driver for my defense system experiments, i attempted to use API3.Filters.byTerritory(), and failed to get it working. I found only one example of it in an elder aegis version, and that was not self-explaining. Finally, I considered it's faster to write my own version than debugging the existant one. @niektb: "unfortunately Aegis was difficult too": The elder testbot was simpler to understand, but has been dropped from the repository. @mimo: "improving the petra doc is in my plans, but I never find the time to do it": Based on my personal experience I can only recommend to write documentation immediately. Otherwise, you might never find the time once the task has grown real big. @agentx: "I've also thought of publishing here a minimal bot, (...) and you are knee deep in map analysis.": I can see that. Maybe this (c|sh)ould lead to a step-by-step tutorial which first uses a hard-coded bot on a hard-coded map, and then expands to more and more flexibility. "I agree with feneur that an invitation to AI devs needs more than a documentation.": I agree with you. I just stumbled on the problem to figure how to use some of the API functions and thought I could help to improve a bit here.
  8. I digged a little deeper. Apparently, JsDoc uses a separate parser for reading .js files - currently, Rhino and Esprima can be used. None of them seems to support the for-of loop construct. With the Mozilla people marking these as experimental, the other JS parser/runtime implementors seem to wait on how the experiment turns out. It might be possible to patch Esprima's parseForStatement() function to accept the new style. I haven't checked that road: Judging by the results of this thread, noone is interested in a (Doxygen-like-)documentation of the bot API. Maybe the intended audience simply does not exist(?). So, i consider my proposal to be rejected.
  9. @agentx: Trying out new ideas will still require knowledge of how to "read the game state/templates" and control the AI player's actionshow to fit in your idea into the current structure of the bot. For example, if you are preparing for an early mass attack with multiple barracks continually training, how to pre-set the economy to provide resources in-time.One can figure out all of this by just reading the sources, but it's probably becoming a challenge. @mimo: The compatibility issue is that JsDoc at the moment does not accept the following for-loop style: for (let id of data.ents) for (let [id, ent] of this._entities)I assume this is a new JS language feature introduced too recently for JsDoc to be already updated. At least, neither me nor any of my JS books knew of that style . If this is a problem, i may try and create a patch so the tool will accept that construct. Currently JsDoc reports a syntax error on these loops while parsing the sources. At two other points i went for a quick cut: Rewrote the API3.Template definition to not use the API3.Class({ ... }) constructor - it seems being phased out anyway. Removed the surrounding anonymous function constructs var API3 = function () { ... }(API3); from the source as they seem to have no effect but encomplicate namespace detection. I presume they are intended for closuring up global variables, but i have not seen any.At these two points, JsDoc accepts the source in its original shape but documenting it without these constructs was easier
  10. Regarding the late game debugging, that's why i am using test suites so to catch at least the obvious faults before starting up a game. Currently i am just using Jasmine tests; but i am afraid for developing an attack/defense system i will have to build up a collection of system tests. This would mean specially designed maps with entities positioned to trip a particular behavior. Seems like a new real can of worms waiting for the tin-opener... But this is going off-topic. I still believe in future, the hurdles mentioned combined with "level of profession" of the then-already-existant AI(s) may limit the number of newcomers in this area more and more.
  11. My idea is more of an API documentation/reference for the "customers" of the common-api (the bot writers) than the API designers. I got into 0AD AI programming by modifying testbot, which was a rather simple construction. With the AIs getting more and more advanced and the API following, i see the barrier for newcomers to raise. In my humble opinion, at least some parts of the common-api out-/bot-side interface require some degree of reverse-engineering to understand. I recall you saying "the hurdles to start with an AI are currently quite high". If this keeps on going, it might result in new people becoming more and more scared off because the interface feels overwhelming and "unfriendly". Besides, your second-last sentence "because it would help to design a new bot api" looks very interesting. Do you mean you'd prefer to discard the current bot/common-api system alltogether and re-start with a better design?
  12. I have just started developing a more advanced(?) attack/defense system for AI bots. I feel the current common-api a bit hard to use: For example, in entity.js the definitions of entity and -templates are lined up one after another, with member functions not sorted. I (have to?) scroll through the whole file when searching for some entity property. So, i got the idea of improving. I have used JsDoc with satisfying results for documenting JavaScript code and applied it to a patched version of the common-api to get a doxygen-like representation. The tool is Apache-licensed, runs on (at least) Windows, Linux, BSD, and is highly customizable on the generated document format (see attachment description below). It should be possible to find or build a layout to fit nicely into the current 0AD documentation. Question: Is there any interest in "officializing" this approach, and to adapt the whole common-api for generated html-docs as in the attachment documentation-proposal.zip? Any comments welcome. The zip archive contains the following sub-sections: /common-api.original: The original common-api files for reference /common-api.jsdoc-compatible: A patched version. JsDoc does not accept the new Map-compatible JS loop style used in the EntityCollections. The module can be run within 0AD but i introduced some bugs (petra is training entities but does not gather/build at the moment)./common-api.documented: The patched version with documentation added./default-layout: The JsDoc output via the default JsDoc template/special-layout: The JsDoc output via the template i use for my AI experiments/documentation (based on an elder JsDoc version). A sample on customizing documentation. I can provide the template if desired.Notes: I have not adapted all parts of the common-api to not waste much efforts if this proposal is rejected. The description of the "EntityCollection" class gives a good idea on how the results may look like. As far as i know, Doxygen does not support JavaScript as an input language. There is a perl script which can convert JS sources into Doxygen-compatible C++. To me, this seems to much "make-do/Rube-Goldberg" style.
  13. I stumbled on the same question before. In short, not each part of the JS scripts can access each C++ method, they have to be reflected into the JS runtime beforehand. In detail: See /source/simulation2/components/CCmpAIManager.cpp - the CAIWorker is the C++ "driver" of a single bot afaik. At construction time, it initiates the m_ScriptInterface: m_ScriptInterface(new ScriptInterface("Engine", "AI", g_ScriptRuntime)) that's the "Engine" object you see in JS. Following in the constructor you see the functions being registered: m_ScriptInterface->RegisterFunction<void, int, CScriptValRooted, CAIWorker::PostCommand>("PostCommand"); m_ScriptInterface->RegisterFunction<void, std::wstring, CAIWorker::IncludeModule>("IncludeModule"); m_ScriptInterface->RegisterFunction<void, CAIWorker::DumpHeap>("DumpHeap"); m_ScriptInterface->RegisterFunction<void, CAIWorker::ForceGC>("ForceGC"); m_ScriptInterface->RegisterFunction<void, std::wstring, std::vector<u32>, u32, u32, u32, CAIWorker::DumpImage>("DumpImage"); So these are the functions of the Engine you can invoke from the AI. Note this list includes "IncludeModule" but not "QueryInterface" so a script cannot break out its sandbox directly. As a side notice, PostCommand is used heavily in the common-api scripts. Additionally, in /binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/components/ you'll find files named AIInterface.js and AIProxy.js; these are for passing the simulation game/state to the AI.
  14. @agentx, are you studying planning techniques as a pro? :-) I'm very interested to see how your planner comes up. I've already toyed around with the idea of a planning AI but without satisfying results. I faced two mental problems (have not experiments by now): Combinatoric explosion. As your state considers more and more game variables, maybe even including the entity layout on the map, i presume it will take more and more computing power to simulate the gameplay into the future? When driven at max, would the planner have to run a de-facto copy of the current game with the examined action taken, to find how it would work out? How do you set up the various operations for the planner - by hand or do you plan on parsing the entity templates (more or less) automatically?Do you plan to give the planner a rough route e.g. to reach city stage and a group of troups or, in the final version, will the planner start with the "simple" goal { isVictorious : true } to figure out everything on its own? @Hephaestion: Yes, i'm fiddling with a bot as well, but currently it's more a puzzle than a real bot :-( Still, made some progress in optimizing the gathering process. Still going slow, as i can just spend an hour or so per day on it, and tend to suffer a bit from analysis paralysis...
  15. Teiresias was a prophet of Apoll, whom Odysseus called up from the dead while he stayed at Circe. He told Odysseus to leave the herds of Helios alone which didn't work out so well... It's an allusion of me being mostly silent/offline, only to show up from time to time to warn on upcoming troubles ;-) Sent from Germany @+2h GMT
  • Create New...