So, I wrote the first thing for Balormo's backend tonight. I wanted to do dice rolls, or really RNG (random number generation) broadly, and in this case I wrote the simplest form of it in the TTRPG space: rolling XdY, take the sum.
I did not write an FE for this yet. That's because I want to discuss the way I designed it. Now would be the time to refactor things or change around how it's structured. This is backend proof of concept phase.
For the time being, you can use curl to try it out once you have an account on dev.iddqd.social:
curl -X POST "https://dev.iddqd.social/api/v1/statuses"
-H "Authorization: Bearer REDACTED"
-H "Content-Type: multipart/form-data"
-F "status=Rolling CON for AD&D 2e style"
-F "source=Pleroma FE"
-F "visibility=public"
-F "content_type=text/plain"
-F "balormo[rng][system]=dice_sum"
-F "balormo[rng][denomination]=6"
-F "balormo[rng][quantity]=3"
Unfortunately, Soapbox and Pleroma seem to drop the balormo object in federation. However, quite fortunately, it delivers the Object URL, which does retain that information:
The way I wrote this is you just add more fields to the /api/v1/statuses endpoint and give it extra fields. In this case, the system field can be changed and the pattern matching will pick up on the right one and then generate dice rolls etc in the right fashion. For example, I might write a Shadowrun dice roller that rolls d6s given only a pool value and re-rolls 6s until you don't get anymore.
The reason to bake this into the protocol is so that you can manage the data better and change the way it's displayed in the future. The appended roll text to the status will be put in a <div> with a class on it that's invisible for the FE.
Thoughts on how to improve this before I move on to the FE?
@NEETzsche@rees@crunklord420@NEETzsche@p@LukeAlmighty@caekislove@lain@jeffcliff@sun >Unfortunately, Soapbox and Pleroma seem to drop the balormo object in federation
Yeah, Pleroma strips all unknown fields from received objects. Having a separate field for arbitrary data that could be extended with anything to frontend's discretion sounds like a good idea to me, though I'd question local experts ( @feld, @i) about possible security implications.
@munir@mint@LukeAlmighty@NEETzsche@caekislove@crunklord420@feld@i@jeffcliff@lain@rees@sun Well, it's not that, but if it were to eventually start to mean something somewhere, that would matter. It's not likely that anything starts trying to pay attention to "balormo", same reason you don't expect Mastodon to start bothering with the "pleroma" field: if it stops being just Pleroma, then you move it out of the "pleroma" field.
Add comment