Page 2 of 2

Re: D(T)runk or not

Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2016 10:05 am
by Svengali
Cody wrote:
... I think 'user-friendly' should be hyphenated.
Muchas gracias, amigo .-)

Re: D(T)runk or not

Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2016 9:32 pm
by Cody
Aegis chatter - would be nice if some systems didn't have it. Randomise it, perhaps - or base it on hub-count?


As an aside, some of the random elements in core Oolite drive me crackers!

Re: D(T)runk or not

Posted: Sun May 01, 2016 3:53 pm
by Svengali
Cody wrote:
Aegis chatter - would be nice if some systems didn't have it. Randomise it, perhaps - or base it on hub-count?
Yep, something must be done there. The older versions did check the number of ships around the station. I've removed it, because filtering is slow. But I don't see a better way atm.

Re: D(T)runk or not

Posted: Thu May 26, 2016 1:34 pm
by Ngalo
Cody wrote:
I don't think settings (specifically chatter) are persisting through exits/reloads - should they?
If I enable FX Redux, the docking-tunnel doors don't look right. Otherwise - cool!
Am I right in thinking Library OXP's config script doesn't actually have the ability to save settings yet?
Please fix this if so because I am making a few OXPs which use it.

Re: D(T)runk or not

Posted: Thu May 26, 2016 2:45 pm
by Svengali
Ngalo wrote:
Am I right in thinking Library OXP's config script doesn't actually have the ability to save settings yet?
Please fix this if so because I am making a few OXPs which use it.
Lib_Config doesn't store anything - it is only a user interface. Every OXP which needs a simple way to offer configurations can use it, but storing and loading saved settings is up to these OXPs. It can notify OXPs if a user changes them if necessary - the readme (Lib_Config.txt) shows you some possibilities and options. OXPConfig on the other side has stored settings, but in the end it was a doomed approach, so Lib_Config is much more flexible.

The settings in BGS are stored (through BGS), but currently it forces its default settings on .startUp until it is completed.

Re: D(T)runk or not

Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 3:59 pm
by Ngalo
Sorry I didn't get it. You are right about flexibility being a good thing; one of my WIPs is actually better off doing the save/load for itself.

A couple of suggestions for you to ignore during any future development of the config interface:
- allow strings to be typed in as well as numbers?
- provide 'save registered settings' / 'load registered settings' helper functions for Dark Siders who don't need anything fancy and are too lazy to do it themselves?

Re: D(T)runk or not

Posted: Sat Jun 11, 2016 11:51 am
by Svengali
Ngalo wrote:
- allow strings to be typed in as well as numbers?
Sounds like a plan.-)
Ngalo wrote:
- provide 'save registered settings' / 'load registered settings' helper functions for Dark Siders who don't need anything fancy and are too lazy to do it themselves?
I'm not sure what you mean with save/load registered settings functions. If you mean multiple different setups for AddOns (e.g modes for un/shadered setups) then this is really better done in these AddOns - scripts, properties and values may change over time, etc. And if you mean to store setups in missionVariables then you are back to script-loading-order and script-execution-fun. But I'm thinking about a simple back-to-defaults thingummie.