Prevalence of low-level bugs, and ease of development vs TrinityCore?

Question

I've been working on getting TrinityCore up and running, battling with the horror that is Ubuntu in order to get things working. Finally got the workflow down, finished two related projects, and I was going to start tinkering with the code. But I found AzerothCore, and I'm very intrigued. Got a few questions about the differences between it and TrinityCore.

First off, AC is advertised as having a modular design, which is brilliant. TC has a single instance of modularity with it's script system, which is also very good; edit the C++ source script, save it, and the server will reload it at runtime without having to recompile the whole server. Is that functionality also present in AC? And how robust is the module system?

My reason for asking is that I want to add more dynamic features rather than focusing on instances, phases, and quests that are repeatable by every single character. The first step for that, would be to change the AI scripting system. So rather than having one monolithic script attached to an NPC, an array of scripts arranged in a hierarchy with conditions that are processed periodically would be a great first foray into the actual code base. Would it be possible to contain that functionality in a replacement module?

Another question I have, is regarding the prevalence of bugs. TC's development does seem a touch slow, and it's community not all that active. How is AC's development in regards to the robustness of the low level systems? With TC, for instance, every so often there would be floating NPCs making their way around Goldshire, which is a rather immersion-breaking bug. Does AC have similarly obvious bugs?

Answer 1

Is that functionality also present in AC? No AC don't have this. Generally because AC runs on old ACE platform.

Modules is a just another way of implanting custom scripts and nothing more for now. You always need to rebuild sources when make changes in modules or add newone.

Another question I have, is regarding the prevalence of bugs. TC's development does seem a touch slow, and it's community not all that active. How is AC's development in regards to the robustness of the low level systems? With TC, for instance, every so often there would be floating NPCs making their way around Goldshire, which is a rather immersion-breaking bug. Does AC have similarly obvious bugs?

All thing what can see player not a coder in AC is good, bugs are minimal and almost all according to vanila or TBC, wotlk part done for 99%

Answer 2

TC has a single instance of modularity with it's script system, which is also very good; edit the C++ source script, save it, and the server will reload it at runtime without having to recompile the whole server. Is that functionality also present in AC?

There is no reload yet in AC, so currently you have to recompile and then restart your server manually.

And how robust is the module system?

The module system in AC is based on the same hooking system (called "scripts") from TC/MaNGOS.

Another question I have, is regarding the prevalence of bugs. TC's development does seem a touch slow, and it's community not all that active. How is AC's development in regards to the robustness of the low level systems?

AC is also based in TC so it is possible to have some common bugs.

However, in AC, all changes are first send via PRs, than they are code-reviewed and manually tested. Also the Travis build should pass, and it makes sure that the core compiles (same as TC) but also makes sure that the change does not introduce DB startup errors.

On the other side, in TC there is no manual testing and new changes are often pushed directly into the master branch by the TC developers (while PRs from new contributors are still code-reviewed first).