Documentation: Use place_meeting() Examples on the Collisions Page Instead of !place_meeting() Which Should Get Updated to place_empty() Anyway

[ParodyKnaveBob]

Is your feature request related to a problem?

I have a personal peeve seeing GM users touting !place_meeting() everywhere when place_empty() will suffice. I want to rant, but I won't.

I just now learned that GM's own manual shows this unnecessary legacy practice on the Collisions page. It says, "The simplest way to check for collisions against objects is to use place_meeting," and then for every following code example uses !place_meeting() to check where there is not a collision.

Describe the solution you'd like

I suggest either stating that the simplest way to check for collisions against *cough* instances is to use place_empty() which seems to be what you truly mean here or give examples where you use place_meeting() without all the nots.

I'd just really, really love to see people using place_empty() the way it's been designed to be used for many years now. Tutorials, long-time GMCers, and (now I find) even the manual says, "use not-function despite perfectly good function."

[gurpreetsinghmatharoo]

It's the same anyway, and introducing new coders to !() conditions is pretty cool.

Closing.