Air transport fix.

Nemo · Post by **Nemo** » 30 Jun 2006, 03:54

wooooo. nice work smoth, much appreciated. I don't pretend to understand any of the code, but this is hugely useful for me/1944. infantry shooting from halftracks/jeeps, anyone?

thanks a bunch.

FLOZi · Post by **FLOZi** » 30 Jun 2006, 03:56

What if you want a mobile air repair pad that is also a transport?

Smoths code is fine and we don't need to go adding things in the name of 'backwards compatibility that will just restrict modders in the long run.

Pxtl · Post by **Pxtl** » 30 Jun 2006, 04:00

Well, for the "air repair pad that is also a con" I think we're getting into welding units together like Zswzg wanted. Would make much more sense to have that be a 2-part unit.

Have to say, I love this patch. One suggestion (not a complaint - not trying to hurt anyone's feelings): how about calling it "ParalyzeTransportee"? Fireplatform suggests it is only relevant to firing. ParalyzeTransportee makes it clear - if true, the transportee is paralyzed. If false, don't. Default is true.

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 30 Jun 2006, 04:04

Pxtl wrote: Have to say, I love this patch. One suggestion (not a complaint - not trying to hurt anyone's feelings): how about calling it "ParalyzeTransportee"? Fireplatform suggests it is only relevant to firing. ParalyzeTransportee makes it clear - if true, the transportee is paralyzed. If false, don't. Default is true.

Because default is paralized. The way you are suggesting is that it needs to be default true.

the way we have it now is default = off so that is why I named it that.

As a modder it makes sense the way it is now.

AF · Post by AF » 30 Jun 2006, 04:23

FLOZi wrote:What if you want a mobile air repair pad that is also a transport?

Smoths code is fine and we don't need to go adding things in the name of 'backwards compatibility that will just restrict modders in the long run.

The point beign that if you define smoths tag this doesnt apply at all.

It only applies to utnis that only define isairbase=1; in their TDF, as soon as there's any mention of isfireplatform the backwards compat routine is ingroed

Caydr · Post by **Caydr** » 30 Jun 2006, 05:11

AF wrote:ingroed

Dragon45 · Post by **Dragon45** » 30 Jun 2006, 05:40

if you want to tool with default noames, just call it "DoNotParalyzeTransportee"

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 30 Jun 2006, 06:23

Dragon, isfireplatform is fine.

Felix the Cat · Post by **Felix the Cat** » 30 Jun 2006, 07:02

Dragon45 wrote:if you want to tool with default noames, just call it "DoNotParalyzeTransportee"

It's a passenger, Dragon. A passenger.

Archangel of Death · Post by **Archangel of Death** » 30 Jun 2006, 07:34

Smoth... I think I will actually retract my statement now. Isfireplatform is the best name possible for it. Or maybe its just these other more clunky on exponential degree names skewing my perception..

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 30 Jun 2006, 07:57

that was the smallest name I could come up with. I liked it

Pxtl · Post by **Pxtl** » 30 Jun 2006, 08:08

smoth wrote:that was the smallest name I could come up with. I liked it

I suppose that's a matter of perspective. I was raised with the focus that clarity > brevity in variable names, but others disagree.

Dragon45 · Post by **Dragon45** » 30 Jun 2006, 08:32

The FBI tags should be self documenting unless anyone wants to deal with even more "help me figure XYZ out" requests on these forums.

To that extent, the "DoNotParalyzePassenger" tag name is better.

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 30 Jun 2006, 08:59

No it isn't.

Stop backseat coding. you don't even make any units dragon. Everyone but you two think the name is fine.

You don't even make units... what you are suggesting is NOT CLEAR.

Pixtl, I don't want to hear your condescending talk, it is clear because that is WHAT THE TAG IS USED TO DETERMINE. You do not make units, you have no mod. You never see this side of spring what has you so interested in MANDATING your perspective on what is a good tag name?

Pxtl · Post by **Pxtl** » 30 Jun 2006, 09:19

smoth wrote: Pixtl, I don't want to hear your condescending talk, it is clear because that is WHAT THE TAG IS USED TO DETERMINE. You do not make units, you have no mod. You never see this side of spring what has you so interested in MANDATING your perspective on what is a good tag name?

What mandating? Maybe the tone came across wrong, but I never meant it as anything but a casual suggestion. There is no need to be defensive. I thought I said from the start: it's just a suggestion, not a complaint.

At any rate, I am working on something to contribute - I'm working on a toolset to make large batch changes to FBI/TDF files trivial. Since this has involved a lot of looking at FBI/TDF files, I took an interest in new variables popping up.

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 30 Jun 2006, 10:01

I am sorry I misunderstood, I am getting on the defensive too often these days, right now I am trying to clear out a distance from the spring community by finishing my current work and getting lost.

Hmm, did you get the new ones from the latest release? I updated some of the wiki a while back but I still have not done a complete update(too much on my plate right now

)

Anyway, sorry about that.

AF · Post by AF » 30 Jun 2006, 15:58

donotparalyzepassenger is a fallacy

It assumes the modder already knows that transports paralyze their untis when they get loaded to stop them firing.

smoths tag isfireplatform is much mor descriptive and doesnt requrie previous knowledge, making it the better solution.

This is not your engine or his or theirs, it is an engine, and if we expect lots of new people to come here we have to be prepared for every eventuality.

Post by **det** » 30 Jun 2006, 16:39

smoth wrote:No it isn't.

Stop backseat coding. you don't even make any units dragon. Everyone but you two think the name is fine.

You don't even make units... what you are suggesting is NOT CLEAR.

Pixtl, I don't want to hear your condescending talk, it is clear because that is WHAT THE TAG IS USED TO DETERMINE. You do not make units, you have no mod. You never see this side of spring what has you so interested in MANDATING your perspective on what is a good tag name?

Do you realize that your confrontational tone is the reason this thread is turning into a flame fest?

As far as the patch goes, I like it. I agree that obfusticating the engine in the name of backwards compatibilty is a bad idea at this point in Spring's development. Also, I think that unless "isFirePlatform" defines a set of behaviors it is better to more acurately describe the one thing it does do. In this case, it prevents the transportable unit from being paralyzed. I would shy away from making paralyzing the default behavior. Therefore, I would reccomend a tag name of "paralyzePassanger". Otherwise, I like Dragon45's tagname of "DontParalyzePassenger".

AF · Post by AF » 30 Jun 2006, 16:43

You totally ignored my post in favor of trying to quash smoth, despite the fact this thread keeps closing up only to be reopened after someone makes an additional comment that doesn't get anywhere.

That opinion and reason has already been stated, find other reasons otherwise it's a waste of space aimed at targeting a user.

And if you think smoth is using a bad tone, that doesn't give you the right to copy it. Bad behaviour is no excuse for bad behaviour. So please, leave the hypocrisy out of his thread and show some respect, or as it would be from your perspective 'taking the moral high ground'

Post by **det** » 30 Jun 2006, 17:00

I don't beleive I was using a "bad" tone and I never suggested he was using a "bad" tone. It is common that someone can get in a passionate argument and be excessively confrontational to the other party without realizing it. Overall, my post was supportive of the patch. I did address your post as well. I reccomended that paralyzing not be made the default behaviour to make it more explicit.

Spring RTS Engine

Air transport fix.