[REJOICE] Mod switcher with graphical user interface!
Moderator: Moderators
-
jouninkomiko
- Posts: 436
- Joined: 26 Aug 2004, 08:11
just a note: C# is exactly equivalent to vb.net, with the exception of syntax. that is, there exists a simple converter from C# -> vb.net and vice versa that upon compilation, generates the exact same code. that's why vb.net is not equivalent to vb, which had its own runtime and everything (and sucked). so, take your pick of either, i personally prefer c syntax, so i picked that.
Hmm. Myself I used folder E:\TASpring\ and runned the program in the specific folder, it worked as it should.mongus wrote:Edit: now i installed the program...
I think it works as i described it, but....
my files ended at C:\Program Files\TASpring\
and not in C:\Archivos de programa\TASpring\
where they should... i think you need to use a system variable... (like %sysroot%) dunno its name.
e: its %PROGRAMFILES%, not sure if can (or how) be used un command prompt.
I cannot find .pt files from my TASpring folder, maybe they are something new stuff my version doesn't have, I installed it 8.5.2005.E: also, it seems pathfinding is redone for each set of units. wich means this program should enable-disable specific path files (*.pt) to each mod.
the current map universe has a path archive around 250 Mb (that is all path archives for every map out there).
I'll try to solve the issues you found out.
Then, Could you point some resources for parsing xml files?Dragon45 wrote:XML-definable mod definition would be nice... everything's better with XML.
I wouldn't like to reinvent the method how to read xml files.
If you'd do that, I could try one kind of thing which searches the xml files from the program folder and translates them for modman so you could use them to switch mods. Thought this begins to go irrelevant and unnecessary.
Myself I'm not a big fan of XML, you are right thouhgt, they could be better with configurations.
The game path thing is not due to your program, sorry.
Its a problem, i think, in the AA installer.
(i had installed AA before, but i forgot that).
About the *.pt files, well its my error too, didnt check the extension.
Its *.pe and *.pe2 files that belog to path calculation i think.
Its a problem, i think, in the AA installer.
(i had installed AA before, but i forgot that).
About the *.pt files, well its my error too, didnt check the extension.
Its *.pe and *.pe2 files that belog to path calculation i think.
Great!Cheery wrote: I'll try to solve the issues
Huh! There are a complete list of these .pe -files. Maybe next could help quickly, I think we could get better solution, but this can be it now,
first, you do two folders, XTAmaps and AAmaps,
then you add them into parameters and tell it they both are maps -folder when enabled. Now you should have what you wanted.
first, you do two folders, XTAmaps and AAmaps,
then you add them into parameters and tell it they both are maps -folder when enabled. Now you should have what you wanted.
Wow, didn't know there was a big difference between VB and VB.net. Thanks for the information. The things people don't learn in college. THANKS :).jouninkomiko wrote:just a note: C# is exactly equivalent to vb.net, with the exception of syntax. that is, there exists a simple converter from C# -> vb.net and vice versa that upon compilation, generates the exact same code. that's why vb.net is not equivalent to vb, which had its own runtime and everything (and sucked). so, take your pick of either, i personally prefer c syntax, so i picked that.
VB.NET has tons of object oriented additions to the syntax. The one cool thing about C# and VB.NET is that implimenting scripting languages is a breeze. There is a built in system for doing it in the API.smoth wrote:Wow, didn't know there was a big difference between VB and VB.net. Thanks for the information. The things people don't learn in college. THANKS :).jouninkomiko wrote:just a note: C# is exactly equivalent to vb.net, with the exception of syntax. that is, there exists a simple converter from C# -> vb.net and vice versa that upon compilation, generates the exact same code. that's why vb.net is not equivalent to vb, which had its own runtime and everything (and sucked). so, take your pick of either, i personally prefer c syntax, so i picked that.
eww - cpp gui code.
Mother of god I forgot how ugly Windows GUI code was in CPP. Really, I don't see why you avoid VB (or any other RAD tool, IE Python, .NET, etc.) for coding such simple gui apps.
No, everything is not better with xml. XML is over generalised for what it's used for. 99.9% of the applications I've seen of XML would be just as easy with an old-fashioned .INI file, and yet the XML is 10x as verbose, as well as the handling code.Dragon45 wrote:XML-definable mod definition would be nice... everything's better with XML.
For example, besides xhtml, have you ever see anyone use mixed tags? No? Then why the distinction between body and attributes? Alternately, can you explain why closing tags are so verbose? When other languages can close a block with a single character, XML requires three characters and a keyword.
XML is the computing industry being too lazy to develop intelligent standards so that the typographic industry shoves them into one that is overly clumsy for normal uses.
Half of the people I see using XML end up just having every tag just have a single attribute "value". That's a sign that something's wrong. In the end, people just code half-assed XML schemas just to satisfy the fact that all their apps work with XML.
I love how people call it "human readable". Just because it's plain text doesn't mean it's legible. It's fugly.
/rant.
-
[K.B.] Napalm Cobra
- Posts: 1222
- Joined: 16 Aug 2004, 06:15
Re: eww - cpp gui code.
Well, windows is ugly...Pxtl wrote:Mother of god I forgot how ugly Windows GUI code was in CPP. Really, I don't see why you avoid VB (or any other RAD tool, IE Python, .NET, etc.) for coding such simple gui apps.
MFC is totally screwed up possibility.
Windows code is ugly too because it's not redesigned since the windows 95.
They are doing something for it when they release the longhorn, but I believe I have been switched my user interface to something more elegant before they get a releaseable version out from it.
I don't feel VB or IE Python, .NET or any other library is so good for something else. With c++ I can make it work just as I want.
But if I would be asked how I'd design the gui code for OS. I would first say that I'd remove that postmessage solution and switch it into a simpler solution which works both for games and editor applications.
http://visualwx.altervista.org/[K.B.] Napalm Cobra wrote:I'm looking into changing from win32 GUI code to wxWidgets, using wx-DevC++.
Use that, it will save you time. If you are using Linux, use wxGlade.
These apps generate the GUI code for you, so that you don't have to hand-code it yourself. Plus wxWidgets code is very portable. You don't have to "#include <windows.h>". =)
It *should* be automatically cross-platform, since it is, after all, Java. However, i will have to delve a little deeper into Java's file handlers to determine if the usage between platforms will be seamless in terms of file and directory manipulation. Although there's no reason why it should not be.
And hell, why not throw in a little Python parser for the mutators... unless someone has a better idea for the mutator scripting language...
And hell, why not throw in a little Python parser for the mutators... unless someone has a better idea for the mutator scripting language...