SonarDistance is broken!

[Forboding Angel]

Mantis'ed: http://springrts.com/mantis/view.php?id=2395

ITT: Google_Frog bitches repeatedly about shit that doesn't matter.

[aegis]

why sonarradius shouldn't be changed to sonardistance.

unitdefs_post to support both conventions, and fix it to one in the engine?

[Forboding Angel]

I'm sure that solution will be perfect for newbie modders and people who don't know any better (because sonar is used so much).

That's assuming I read your post right.

"Well why don't you just fix it in unitdefs post? Instead we have to go to all the trouble to fix it in the engine??"

Well, duh. That's what we do with bugs generally.

[Forboding Angel]

Oh wow, found even more fail. This is definitely broken crap. Mantis'ed

http://springrts.com/mantis/view.php?id=2395

[AF]

Isn't this a TAism?

[aegis]

and fix it

"Instead"

I'm not sure you read it correctly, assuming your quote was a reinterpretation...

could go through all the tags and decide on a consistent naming scheme, replace them in the engine, then provide a compatibility layer in unitdefs_post so old mods aren't broken.

[Forboding Angel]

Yeah it was a reinterpretation, because i didn't understand what you wrote. And yeah, I got your meaning totally wrong.

Well apparently according to JK, the tag used is SonarDistance (Which is still broken), the the ticket probably won't get done now because Google_Frog wants to argue semantic BS that doesn't even matter.

Sigh, this place is really frustrating at times. You know, that bug report is the main reason I don't report more issues, because every time I do, I have some retard running in wanting to argue about some shit that isn't even relevant to the problem.

[Google_Frog]

Well apparently according to JK, the tag used is SonarDistance (Which is still broken), the the ticket probably won't get done now because Google_Frog wants to argue semantic BS that doesn't even matter.

How is the fact that you assume the UnitDefs lua table contains all the engine tags irrelevant? It is very relevant as your information on tags is completely wrong, the broken tag you were talking about does not actually exist. It is only an extra unneeded value in the UnitDefs table accessible by lua.

[Forboding Angel]

I said both are broken. Read.

The fact that i mistakenly thought that sonarradius was a unitdef tag has no bearing as BOTH are BROKEN.

It just so happens that sonarradius being broken isn't actually a bug because it doesn't exist.

Even so, SonarDistance is still broken.

But like a broken record, you only want to talk about the fact that I thought that sonorradius was an engine tag, bypassing the point that SonarDistance is BROKEN!

[Forboding Angel]

In case you missed it the first time (because you generally have to be told 50 times before you get it into your thick skull...),

SonarDistance is BROKEN!

[Google_Frog]

Top says it all.

According to: http://springrts.com/wiki/Lua_UnitDefs [^]

UnitDefs[216]["sonarJamRadius"] = 0,
UnitDefs[216]["sonarRadius"] = 300,
UnitDefs[216]["sonarStealth"] = false,

^^ Those are the only sonar related tags in the engine, except for the small quirk that sonar radius does not work on scout planes and you HAVE to use sonardistance.

Those aren't the only sonar related tags in the engine. I'm correcting you on your incorrect statement that you made in the first sentence of the bug report, that seems pretty important. I explained jk's unhelpful post "INPUT != OUTPUT" which from your subsequent post it was clear you had not understood.

Your post was about bugs with sonardistance and sonarradius. I clarified things by mentioning that sonarradius does not exist. That does not mean I disagree with anything you have said about sonardistance. I did not mention sonardistance as there was nothing useful to add there but I could comment on sonarradius, I also hoped to inform you on what the UnitDefs table is so you could acquire more useful information in the future. The comment was posted once and it would have been left as an aside unless you decided to take offence at being wrong in a small part of your report.

Frankly you're being insulting and pigheaded. You take my clarification on one of the two tags you mention in your report and decide that I disagree with everything you said. For some reason you then take offence and think I am arguing. Then you insult me here and claim I bitched about it repeatedly when I defend myself.

I never disagreed anywhere that sonardistance is broken, you've made that up.

[jK]

Your presuppositions are wrong and so the ticket is invalid!
What gf said is 100% correct, and he just `translated` what I said cause it seems you didn't understood it.
We didn't talked about inconstancies or bugs yet at all - and I don't see a reason to do so until you tested your problems with corrected presuppositions.

And bold red text makes it just harder to talk seriously with you...

[Forboding Angel]

Your presuppositions are wrong and so the ticket is invalid!

^^ And this is exactly why bugs like this go forever without being fixed.

Here's an idea, maybe you should edit the title of the bug report, or perhaps even add a note about it being sonardistance that is the issue and the rest is junk (but maybe I just approach incoming bug reports too logically and without enough bs).

Both of you repeatedly harp about my "presuppositions" being incorrect without any discussion as to the bug itself and instead derailing in this inane direction... Who gives a fuck? So what? SonarRadius doesn't exist. BAW! I don't care! I would just like to report that sonar is fucked!

Aha, that's it! All I have to do in the future is just be vague about the bug reports!

So here is my new bug report:

Title: Sonar is fucked!
Body: Shit doesn't work on ground units!
Severity (this part cracks me up, because for me it breaks a decent part of the water war game in evo, so to me it's pretty fucking severe, but...): Minor
Reproducibility: Always

Your presuppositions are wrong and so the ticket is invalid!

Oh really? Lets go over the ticket shall we?

Title: SonarDistance <-> SonarRadius - Neither work on ground units
Body: Top says it all.

According to: http://springrts.com/wiki/Lua_UnitDefs [^]

UnitDefs[216]["sonarJamRadius"] = 0,
UnitDefs[216]["sonarRadius"] = 300,
UnitDefs[216]["sonarStealth"] = false,

^^ Those are the only sonar related tags in the engine, except for the small quirk that sonar radius does not work on scout planes and you HAVE to use sonardistance.
Severity: Minor
Reproducibility: Always

The title is that sonardistance doesn't work on ground units with a side of me being incorrect about some stupid shit in the damn engine. SonarDistance happens to be fucked, therefore, the ticket is not invalid (Simply factually incorrect in a minor spot).

[Kloot]

Now maybe start using that legendary analytical mind of yours and figure out where your "presuppositions" need revision (HINT SINCE YOU WILL JUST MISINTERPRET THE IMAGE ANYWAY: RANGE IS NOT THE KEY PARAMETER).

FTR: this is the last time I'm even bothering to respond to you.

[Forboding Angel]

FTR: this is the last time I'm going to bother responding to you.

These two units cannot see each other. Both have sonar distance 500. The only way they can see each other is if a scout plane with sonar flies overhead.

In this screenshot I am in /spectator The units cannot see each other.

screen00306.jpg

(1.36 MiB) Downloaded 3 times

OHH THAT'S RIGHT! IF IT WORKS IN BA IT MUST BE FINE AMIRITE?

Next time before being an ass, you might bother actually testing.

[kremmy]

OHH THAT'S RIGHT! IF IT WORKS IN BA IT MUST BE FINE AMIRITE?

If it works in one mod, but not another mod, the reasonable conclusion is that a problem exists in the other mod. The bug might not be where you think the bug is. Doesn't get us any closer to figuring out what the bug actually is, but it makes this whole attitude stupid.

[Forboding Angel]

The point is the the Engine Devs rarely bother to actually test where the problem is. The *A motto tends to be, "It's not a bug, it's a feature!"

[smoth]

The point is the the Engine Devs rarely bother to actually test where the problem is. The *A motto tends to be, "It's not a bug, it's a feature!"

The engine devs cannot check every bug. That is why mantis exists. It is good enough that they are volunteering their time to fix the bug. if you are going to ask them to fix something try and work to either isolate the cause OR work with them to do that. Railing them only makes them feel used and unappreciated.

[Forboding Angel]

Actually the only person I yelled at was google. That and I called kloot an ass (considering that he essentially called me the same and accused me of not testing which I did extensively before making bug report).

Also, while we're on the subject of BS:

in: https://github.com/spring/spring/blob/m ... nitDef.cpp (which as you all know is the PROPER resource for engine tags)

SonarRadius is mentioned many times.

[Nemo]

The mentions of "sonarRadius" in that file are reading the value of the unit def tag "sonarDistance" into the Lua unit def table (where "sonarDistance" doesn't exist, and is named "sonarRadius"). Not really BS from anyone in this thread, just weird differences between Lua unit def table tag names and the actual tag.