Saveboxes doesn't actually save

[Forboding Angel]

This has been an issue for years now. Draw boxes. !saveboxes. "Boxes saved successfully". Change map, change map back, boxes not there.

Hopefully you can understand just how insanely fucking irritating this is:

[bibim]

Start boxes work perfectly fine, but for some reason you have set "extraBox" to 1 on your autohost. So you actually need to create 3 boxes for a game with 2 teams (this is normally useful for King Of The Hill type of games for example).

Code: Select all

[07:31:09] <bibim_> !settings box
[07:31:10] <EvoRTSDedicated1> Name      Current value  Allowed values
[07:31:10] <EvoRTSDedicated1> --------  -------------  --------------
[07:31:10] <EvoRTSDedicated1> extraBox  1              1             
[07:31:10] <EvoRTSDedicated1> =======================================

According to extraBox setting documentation:

"extraBox": Specifies the number of extra boxes that much be created in addition to normal team start boxes.
This preset setting is only used by SPADS to separate normal sets of stat boxes from special sets of start boxes when saving/loading map start boxes. That way, saved boxes for King Of The Hill don't overwrite normal team games start boxes for instance.

Next time, when you find something "insanely fucking irritating" for years, please try to take a look a the documentation to understand how things work instead of supposing something so basic doesn't work. It could save you time and annoyance...

[gajop]

To play the middle man here, maybe there could be some additional warning message to the user that the extraBox is used.

[Silentwings]

Afaics the user would have had to already set that themselves, so should already know.

[Forboding Angel]

It's set that way by default.

Perhaps if weird defaults like that weren't set, it wouldn't be so "extremely fucking irritating".

Thank you for the help. Additionally, having a variable/setting named "extrabox" probably isn't the best idea. It gives absolutely no indication of what it is/does.

Edit: Also, exactly how in the fuck would I be expected to know that extrabox is the reason???
Seriously? Dude the only person who would know that is you and someone who has dealt with this before.

[Silentwings]

No, the default is 0, as it says in the documentation, on the one single page that documents every SPADS setting, in the very same position that you were actually linked too.

Also, as it says, the "extraBox" setting is for when you decide you want an extra box. It's not so mysterious.

[bibim]

It's set that way by default.

No.

Perhaps if weird defaults like that weren't set, it wouldn't be so "extremely fucking irritating".

Two advices:
1. Try to take a look at the documentation before editing random settings in your SPADS configuration files
2. Try to remember what you change in these configuration files if you want to tell me what is default or not disregarding the documentation. It makes you look bad in my eyes when you claim such wrong facts with such aplomb.

The default value for extraBox is obviously 0 since the day it got introduced in SPADS 0.8.0, more than 5 years ago...

Additionally, having a variable/setting named "extrabox" probably isn't the best idea. It gives absolutely no indication of what it is/does.

Yes it does. It indicates an extra box is needed, i.e. 3 boxes for a 2 team game, 4 boxes for a 3 team game etc.
What name would you suggest?

[bibim]

Edit: Also, exactly how in the fuck would I be expected to know that extrabox is the reason???
Seriously? Dude the only person who would know that is you and someone who has dealt with this before.

As long as you change random settings in SPADS configuration files without taking a look at the documentation of these settings, I'm afraid you will have problems like this. But this is quite the same for any configurable program, not just SPADS.

However, you still could have found easily the cause of your problem in two ways:
1) searching "box" in SPADS documentation, which would have quickly lead you to the extraBox setting which explains this behavior in details (cf my first post in this thread).
2) searching "box" in the current settings of your autohost, using command "!settings box" (cf my first post in this thread). You would have seen that the only setting found is "extraBox", and that its current value is not the default.

[Forboding Angel]

Edit: Also, exactly how in the fuck would I be expected to know that extrabox is the reason???
Seriously? Dude the only person who would know that is you and someone who has dealt with this before.

This is the important bit though. This has absolutely no obvious bearing on saveboxes.

I'm not in a habit of changing random values. Perhaps it was set way back when I was taking advice from other autohost runners on the best way to set up the hosts.

Once again, that would be years ago.

Maybe simply beefing up the documentation on saveboxes would do the trick.

Code: Select all

!saveBoxes - saves map boxes for current map

Code: Select all

!saveBoxes - saves map boxes for current map. 
*Caution*
Extrabox being set can cause it to appear as though saveboxes is not working.

Additionally, saveboxes could have a warning that extrabox is enabled when the command is called.

This, is very unclear:

Code: Select all

Specifies the number of extra boxes that much be created in addition to normal team start boxes.
This preset setting is only used by SPADS to separate normal sets of stat boxes from special sets of start boxes when saving/loading map start boxes. That way, saved boxes for King Of The Hill don't overwrite normal team games start boxes for instance.

This, is much clearer:

Code: Select all

If enabled, an additional box must be added. This is, of course, in addition to the normal amount of team start boxes (E.g. for 2 teams, 3 boxes are needed, for 3 teams 4 boxes are needed, etc).

SPADS uses this preset setting to differentiate normal groupings of start boxes from special groupings of start boxes. This differentiation occurs anytime when SPADS saves/loads a group of map start boxes.

In this way, we can ensure that "special" saved groupings of start boxes for a given map will not override the "normal" start box groupings used for team games on that map.

*Caution*
Extrabox being set can cause it to appear as though saveboxes is not working

That original docu is worded awkwardly as hell. I've read it multiple times and still it's confusing as hell. I consider mine to be confusing as well, but MUCH less so.

[bibim]

This is the important bit though. This has absolutely no obvious bearing on saveboxes.

So you mean that when you read this: "used by SPADS to separate normal sets of start boxes from special sets of start boxes when saving/loading map start boxes" it doesn't make you think it impacts the map box save/load system?

Code: Select all

*Caution*
Extrabox being set can cause it to appear as though saveboxes is not working.

No, !saveBoxes works exactly as it should when extraBox is enabled. For example if you save a set of 2 boxes while extraBox=1 (1 normal start box + 1 extra box), then this set of boxes will be automatically loaded when nbTeams=1 and extraBox=1. If it "appears" as not working for you then it means you didn't understand the setting.

That original docu is worded awkwardly as hell. I've read it multiple times and still it's confusing as hell. I consider mine to be confusing as well, but MUCH less so.

I guess this is subjective. I find yours both redundant (duplicate information, not more information than mine) and obscure ("... can cause it to appear ..."). It's true that there are two typos that I will fix though.

Additionally, saveboxes could have a warning that extrabox is enabled when the command is called.

I don't think a "warning" should be printed every time you save boxes and extraBox is enabled. When you enable extraBox you're supposed to know what it does, so you don't want a warning to appear each time you save boxes. SPADS can't guess you blindly changed this setting without knowing what it does...
On the other hand when you try to load map boxes explictly and SPADS can't find them, then this is a place where something unexpected happens. That's why SPADS prints a message explaining exactly what it's looking for when you try to load map boxes using the !loadBoxes command. For example in the case of your screenshot, simply doing "!loadBoxes" (without any parameter, so that it tries to load boxes for current map and current settings) would have returned this exact message:

Code: Select all

Unable to find saved start boxes for map "Fetid Marsh - v05" with 2 teams and 1 extra box

[Jools]

I wasn't aware of the extra box command. We've just always manually added one box for maps where koth is common. It doesn't matter if there is one extra box if koth is disabled, it wills till work as planned.

[bibim]

You mean you manually added an extra box each time you played KOTH?

[Forboding Angel]

No, because if I did ctrl+f for saveboxes, extrabox would not have been in the results of the search. Hence the cycle continues.

Your docu frankly doesn't make any sense as it is written. The sentence structure is awkward as hell and the duplication of terms is extremely confusing (this is why I used the word "grouping" instead of "set" -- Grouping might not be the best word for it, but in this case, it makes the sentences much less difficult to read/comprehend).

[bibim]

No, because if I did ctrl+f for saveboxes, extrabox would not have been in the results of the search. Hence the cycle continues.

Why would you do ctrl+f for saveboxes? You changed the extraBox setting, that's the one you should be looking for. And if you don't remember how it was named or don't know what produces the behavior you observe, you just need to look for "box" to find anything related to boxes in the documentation as I told you already.

Your docu frankly doesn't make any sense as it is written. The sentence structure is awkward as hell

Thank you for your opinion.

the duplication of terms is extremely confusing (this is why I used the word "grouping" instead of "set" -- Grouping might not be the best word for it, but in this case, it makes the sentences much less difficult to read/comprehend).

What duplication of terms are you referring to exactly?

[Forboding Angel]

No, because if I did ctrl+f for saveboxes, extrabox would not have been in the results of the search. Hence the cycle continues.

Why would you do ctrl+f for saveboxes? You changed the extraBox setting, that's the one you should be looking for. And if you don't remember how it was named or don't know what produces the behavior you observe, you just need to look for "box" to find anything related to boxes in the documentation as I told you already.

Because "saveboxes" <airquotes>weren't working</airquotes>. As a result the logical answer would be to look at the docu on saveboxes. I did not know that the behavior that was taking place was a result of extrabox. I don't even know how I would know to look there, because it's obvious that the docu is extremely unclear as to what extrabox even does.I have an extremely high reading comprehension level and I'm sitting here reading it over and over trying to understand what it is saying.

It's not that the sentence structure of the docu for extrabox is complex, it's simply that it is not good sentence structure. My proposed revisions might seem redundant to you, but they paint a clearer picture of what it is used for. Also, the caution bit would be caught up in a search for saveboxes therefore making it easier on everyone and ensuring that this thread never happens again by anyone else.

[bibim]

Because "saveboxes" <airquotes>weren't working</airquotes>. As a result the logical answer would be to look at the docu on saveboxes.

I have to admit I don't understand your "extremely high reading comprehension level".

When people hit "!saveBoxes" and then read a confirmation message "Start boxes saved for map Fetid Marsh - v05" (as seen in your screenshot), they usually don't come to the conclusion that the !saveBoxes command isn't working... If boxes aren't loaded as they expect, it can be a problem in the saving, a problem in the loading, or the entire box management system which is badly configured. So they will look for "box" in SPADS documentation to get all available information about SPADS map boxes system instead of focusing on the !saveBoxes command which seems to work normally.

I did not know that the behavior that was taking place was a result of extrabox.

Indeed, this sort of things may happen when you blindly change random settings and forget it. However I explained you several times already how you could have found the explanation in the documentation yourself, only using normal comprehension level so this should be very easy for you.

I don't even know how I would know to look there

That is because you limit your search in SPADS documentation based on the wrong assumption that the saveBoxes command isn't working, so of course you miss relevant information.
If you decide to look for "saveBoxes" you will only get information about the !saveBoxes command. If you look for "box", as I explained, you will get all the results related to SPADS map boxes system and will find the setting responsible for the behavior you observed.

[bibim]

it's obvious that the docu is extremely unclear as to what extrabox even does.I have an extremely high reading comprehension level and I'm sitting here reading it over and over trying to understand what it is saying.

It's not that the sentence structure of the docu for extrabox is complex, it's simply that it is not good sentence structure.

It's entirely possible that the documentation concerning this very specific "extraBox" setting, which is disabled by default, might not be perfectly clear for someone not needing it and not even aware of this functionality.

I'm sure your "extremely high reading comprehension level" make it easy for you to understand it would be way too much time consuming for me to write a perfect and exhaustive documentation given that I do that for free on my free time only. SPADS documentation is already quite good for such a niche free open-source software.
That being said, one is always welcome to ask for explanations when he encounters something he doesn't understand in the documentation, I will gladly try to rephrase it and even update the documentation if I find a better way to explain it which satisfies both of us. That's the way normal people deal with such problems.

But your way of criticizing the documentation in every vague way you can find ("docu is worded awkwardly as hell", "Your docu frankly doesn't make any sense as it is written", "the duplication of terms is extremely confusing", "it's obvious that the docu is extremely unclear" ...) instead of asking for explanations goes clearly in the opposite direction. And when I try to understand what you mean, asking you what name you would suggest if "extraBox" is such a bad name for a setting indicating that extra boxes are needed, or asking you what duplication of terms you are referring to, you don't even answer, obviously...

My proposed revisions might seem redundant to you, but they paint a clearer picture of what it is used for.

Your proposed revision is not only redundant and obscure for the reasons I detailed previously, but it is also wrong from the very first sentence. "If enabled, an additional box must be added" is wrong. "extraBox" isn't a boolean setting, but really a number (integer), as stated in the documentation: "Format / Allowed values: Integer". For example if you set it to 2 it means two extra boxes are needed. This is clearly explained in the first sentence of my documentation: "Specifies the number of extra boxes that must be created in addition to normal team start boxes."

[Forboding Angel]

We obviously disagree and you obviously aren't going to change your stance/position on it. As such I don't see much point in pursuing it further. I accepted that there was nothing to gain for either of us and moved on.

Why are you replying to yourself?

Sidenote, you took my critique of a single paragraph of docu and warped it to apply to the entirety of the docu for spads. I was very specifically talking about the docu for extrabox. I was not unclear about that.

[bibim]

We obviously disagree and you obviously aren't going to change your stance/position on it. As such I don't see much point in pursuing it further. I accepted that there was nothing to gain for either of us and moved on.

Thank you.

Why are you replying to yourself?

I'm not replying to myself, I'm replying to you. If you check the quotes in my messages you will see they are all prefixed by "Forboding Angel wrote:" which means you are the author of these quotes. Also, if you check the content of these quotes you will see my last message is just answering the remaining part of your message that wasn't answered by my previous message. I just split my answer in two parts because it was too long, that's all.

Sidenote, you took my critique of a single paragraph of docu and warped it to apply to the entirety of the docu for spads. I was very specifically talking about the docu for extrabox. I was not unclear about that.

Where did I do such a thing?
You can replace "But your way of criticizing the documentation ..." in my previous answer by "But your way of criticizing the extraBox documentation ..." if you prefer, that's what I meant anyway and it doesn't change anything.

[Forboding Angel]

But your way of criticizing the documentation in every vague way you can find ("docu is worded awkwardly as hell", "Your docu frankly doesn't make any sense as it is written", "the duplication of terms is extremely confusing", "it's obvious that the docu is extremely unclear" ...) instead of asking for explanations goes clearly in the opposite direction. And when I try to understand what you mean, asking you what name you would suggest if "extraBox" is such a bad name for a setting indicating that extra boxes are needed, or asking you what duplication of terms you are referring to, you don't even answer, obviously...

You start with referencing my critique of the docu as a whole, and only after that do you mention specifics (extrabox). You may not have meant to apply what I said to the entire documentation, but that is, exactly what you said.

Please stop taking everything I say as a personal affront.