Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => FS2 Open Coding - The Source Code Project (SCP) => Topic started by: Bobboau on June 27, 2002, 01:28:50 am
-
are you still around? :)
anyway
I, and I would asume others are going to, need a POF editor for new data types, I was wondering if you would be so kind as to ether,
make some changes for people on an individual basis,
make a plugin SDK that would alow us to make new data types,
or just open source the whole thing
forever in debt to you,
the modest Bobboau
:D
-
The last I saw of Kazan was one post on the art forum... before that was explaining he had exams at this time of year and so on... he's still on ICQ though - you could try and reach him that way.
And yes, making it open source/helping out with that would save a hell of a lot of time...
-
there is a plugin SDK
-
I thought all that was capable of was new convertion model formats, is it enough for me to be able to write new data types, including new interface and stuff
-
not interface, but you can export to new file types
-
well the thing is I need some way of editing new data chuncks, if there is no way to get interface for this, I don't think it'll be able to do what I need
-
when someone presents me with a OFFICIAL MAIN OPENSOURCE VERSION OF FS2 [caps for emphasis] then i'll fork POF CS and have a version for the origional, and a version for the new engine
i will support the origional POF and ONE THIRD PARTY POF VERSION- the one that's part of the OFFICIAL NEW ENGINE
all programming efforts should be on one version anyway - multiple versions ==== baadd
-
well that's ok, but untill then I have no way of testing my code, right now I have to take the closest chunck type and rename it with a hex editor, and anything that won't fit into that I just have to give default values, now I understand that you don't want to / can't suport all twenty thousand veriations of the code, wich is why I would like some sort of SDK capable of generating a custome data type, doesn't have to be prety or that user frendly, something that generates a popup window or something would be sufushent,
but if you arn't going to do it, I guess I should just think of some other way of doing it :(
-
i should be able to think up a way to write more complete plugins
-
As an aside - what's becomming of Freespace Forever? It's been dead on that forum for a while now - is the forum still required?
-
i said it was dead, having the origional source made it pointless
-
some of the topics might posably be usefull, like wishlist type things, and ideas how to implement them
-
I agree, I think although the forum should be closed - a salvage operation is in order. If anyone has any ideas on how to sort through the topics for useful content then please tell me - without suggestions it's a case of moving each one thats useful - lengthy job :)
-
Originally posted by Kazan
when someone presents me with a OFFICIAL MAIN OPENSOURCE VERSION OF FS2 [caps for emphasis] then i'll fork POF CS and have a version for the origional, and a version for the new engine
We're working on it... Inquisitor and others (myself included) decided on the fs2_open project (at warpcode) as a starting point. I am trying to get it back in playable format for Win32, after I hacked it to pieces getting it to work for Linux :)
all programming efforts should be on one version anyway - multiple versions ==== baadd
Agree 100% I'll post in this forum when we've got a stable starting point.
Inquisitor is building up the "feature request list" as well. Dunno if he's getting stuff from the FSF forum as well, or just from this one. It's a herculean task, almost literally -- cleaning out the stables, etc. ;)
-
Which is a bit of a pain, but it's getting there :)
BTW, you could HELP Kazan, instead of barking from the sidelines ;)
I'm of a mixed opinion on the FSF thing. Maybe I'll find some FS enthusiasts in #garagegames and see if they want to take the TQ build I have to the next level while we concentrate on the "official" source ;)
-
i could help, but that code makes me ill
no offense to dave or anything, it's just that much spagetti code makes me ill
-
*chuckle*
::shakes head::
Well at least in this post 9/11 age, there are some constants I can cling to.
-
lol dave. In reality i'll eventually start picking at that code
that much spagetti code like that confuses the hell out of me, i need a flow chart for it to keep track of it. I can only imagine how big of a ***** it had to be for you to keep track of it while you were writing it.
Part of the reason I like OOP, you read the headers and you can follow all you really need to know unless you have to change the function - in which you don't have to dig that much deeper.
-
hey dave you guy's wouldn't by chanse have any flow charts or anything like that laying around would you?
I've been meaning to ask this for a while but I keep forgeting
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
hey dave you guy's wouldn't by chanse have any flow charts or anything like that laying around would you?
I've been meaning to ask this for a while but I keep forgeting
mhh, seems dave posts only to reply to kazan, in fact, they like each other but won't confess it (http://forum.hardware.fr/images/perso/twark.gif)
Mwarf, really.
-
No comment.
-
nothing but love for you, nothing but love
(http://forum.hardware.fr/images/perso/twark.gif)
(http://forum.hardware.fr/images/perso/twark.gif)
(http://forum.hardware.fr/images/perso/twark.gif)
(http://forum.hardware.fr/images/perso/twark.gif)
(http://forum.hardware.fr/images/perso/twark.gif)
(http://forum.hardware.fr/images/perso/twark.gif)
-
Ugh. Must...resist....stupidity....
-
Originally posted by daveb
Thunder Edit: Removed for... um, great justice...
Don't worry - just don't let it get out of hand, I'd hate to have to close threads because of you of all people! I'm not sure I could live with myself ;)
-
hehehehe dave.
now day be nice. I haven't done anything to you.
-
you all crack me up :lol:
would it not be possible, to use the subobject properties (that field where you imput turret info and other stuff) to store pof specific data, rather that creating totally new chunks. unless what you had planned was a more complicated thing that needed a new chunk, i see no problem placing settings in the subobject properties.
-
you crack me up - because it is more complex than properties and requires a new chunk :rolleyes:
before you go laughing at someone know what they're talking about :cool:
the joke is on you Nuke :doh:
-
I think he was laughing at you and dave bickering,
and makeing an ignorant stab at trying to solve my problem
-
Indeed, try and avoid bashing people un-necessarily guys...
Glances at Kazan...
-
hey i wasn't bickering with dave
-
And Nuke...?
I'm not really complaining - I'd just appreciate it if you could see everyones point of view on things like code, ideas and so on before damning their stupidity (even if they are stupid...).
Thanks :)
-
i wish you'd stop assuming that i didn't see his point of view
if it was something that could go in object properties it would - but many of our changes are not.
-
I'm note disputing the actual outcome, just the way you handle it - I know we've been through it all before but just try and be a little more human if you can - try "that wouldn't work I'm afraid, because..." instead of just telling them how little they know or something.
As I say, I'm not having a go - just trying to help everyone get along a little better :)
-
i was laughing at the bickering and that joke that kaz and dave really like eachother. my idea was kinda stupid. my knoledge of programing really doesnt go far beyond quake c and visual basic.
were all cool here, right (ducks to avoid incoming beam).
-
and that joke that kaz and dave really like eachother.
To be quite frank, it would be a mistake to assume this. I know it might be immature and silly of me at this point....but....there you have it.
-
are you trying to bate me into ranting at you?
Not going to happen, though i agree with your last post.
I've time and time again offered apologies and what not.
-
And if either of you were half as mature as you'd like the rest of us to believe you'd let the topic drop and grow up a bit.
Sadly not, so without further ado...