Page 4 of 5
Re: Alternative Contracts Interface
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 8:23 pm
by Wildeblood
Tricky wrote:I fear Godwin's law is around the corner.
"Press Space Commander" does not need to be commified (made up word), and even if it did, the original and seminal work that Oolite is based upon did not have the comma.
Who is this Godwin, and how is he relevant? "Press space commander" is simply wrong, and most definitely does need to have a comma.
Re: Alternative Contracts Interface
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 8:27 pm
by Gimbal Locke
Wildeblood wrote:Who is this Godwin, and how is he relevant? "Press space commander" is simply wrong, and most definitely does need to have a comma.
I guess Tricky is referring to "grammar nazi" and ...
Oh noes, I think
I did it!
Re: Alternative Contracts Interface
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 9:02 pm
by Tricky
Please refer to the second paragraph of my comment...
Tricky wrote:"Press Space Commander" does not need to be commified (made up word), and even if it did, the original and seminal work that Oolite is based upon did not have the comma.
Oolite is based upon Elite. Elite did not have a comma.
Despite that, it still does NOT need a comma.
Re: Alternative Contracts Interface
Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 9:22 pm
by Cody
<chortles>
Tricky wrote:Oolite is based upon Elite. Elite did not have a comma.
I don't remember BBC Elite (all upper case letters, I think) having a comma in
Right on, Commander... but Oolite does (and rightly so).
Re: Alternative Contracts Interface
Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 12:48 am
by Tricky
:sighs
"Right on, Commander" is just so wrong. 3 words; why the break in the sentance? Same argument for "Press Space, Commander". In fact, it isn't even a sentance, it's a statement of fact.
Re: Alternative Contracts Interface
Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 1:54 am
by Wildeblood
Tricky wrote:"Right on, Commander" is just so wrong. 3 words; why the break in the sentance? Same argument for "Press Space, Commander".
I already explained why on the previous page.
Tricky wrote:In fact, it isn't even a sentance...
Tricky, you are correct that "Press space commander" is not even a sentence - because it is ungrammatical. "Press space, commander," however,
is a sentence.
Tricky wrote:...it's a statement of fact.
It most certainly is not. It is a sentence in the imperative mood. That is easily recognised by the verb (to press) being the first word of the sentence.
Re: Alternative Contracts Interface
Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 2:05 am
by Tricky
Wildeblood wrote:Tricky, you are correct that "Press space commander" is not even a sentence - because it is ungrammatical. "Press space, commander," however, is a sentence.
You miss the point.
It is a statement not a sentance. Or maybe I miss your point and we are arguing different points.
Re: Alternative Contracts Interface
Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 2:32 am
by Wildeblood
Tricky wrote:Wildeblood wrote:Tricky, you are correct that "Press space commander" is not even a sentence - because it is ungrammatical. "Press space, commander," however, is a sentence.
You miss the point.
It is a statement not a sentance. Or maybe I miss your point and we are arguing different points.
Hmm, you enthusiastically replied while I was still editing my post.
I'm not missing your point at all, I'm simply telling you that you're wrong. Your error stems from the notion that there is such a thing as a statement which is not a sentence. Sentences come in several moods, among them declarative and imperative. The sentiment you are trying to express is that "Press space, commander," is an imperative, not a (more common in English) declarative, sentence - it is giving you an instruction.
Because it is an imperative sentence it's easy to see that it requires the comma after "space". It can be written simply as "Press space" and have the identical meaning. The word "commander" is an unnecessary appositive, which does not modify the meaning, and is therefore set off by a comma.
(A declarative sentence simply declares information, but does not give instruction. An example would be: "There is a space bar you could press, if you wanted to, commander." (Again in that example addressing the addressee as "commander" contributes nothing to the meaning.))
Re: Alternative Contracts Interface
Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 3:37 am
by Tricky
I'm going to stop here as I in no way intended to start a flame war. My initial post was only just to point out my thoughts on this matter.
Appologies to the original thread starter and all others that were keeping to topic.
Re: Alternative Contracts Interface
Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:53 am
by Diziet Sma
cim wrote:Hmm... that suggests that it isn't clearing your HUD successfully, or at least quickly enough. Does it still happen with no OXPs installed?
Nope.. found the culprit, by a process of elimination.
It's the Hud Vanisher OXP, which auto-hides the hud when exterior views are selected. Dunno why it would have that effect when docked, but in vanilla trunk, even when it's the only OXP installed, the text appears on that screen.
I've posted a report in the
relevant thread.
Re: Alternative Contracts Interface
Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 8:42 am
by Eric Walch
I am not an expert in English grammar, but you can interpret the sentence "press space commander" in two ways:
You have to "press" on the "space commander".
or
it is an instruction for the "commander" to "press space".
Only the use of a comma can make clear which of the two options was mend (or use common sense
).
Re: Alternative Contracts Interface
Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 9:15 am
by cim
Diziet Sma wrote:It's the Hud Vanisher OXP, which auto-hides the hud when exterior views are selected. Dunno why it would have that effect when docked, but in vanilla trunk, even when it's the only OXP installed, the text appears on that screen.
Ah - and probably auto shows the HUD on any other screen change, which interferes with the contracts interface trying to manage this.
Thanks for checking.
Re: Alternative Contracts Interface
Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 12:02 pm
by Diziet Sma
cim wrote:Ah - and probably auto shows the HUD on any other screen change, which interferes with the contracts interface trying to manage this.
I'm not sure about that.. because it doesn't affect any other screens when
they change.. just that one.
Re: Alternative Contracts Interface
Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 12:34 pm
by Wildeblood
cim wrote:Diziet Sma wrote:It's the Hud Vanisher OXP, which auto-hides the hud when exterior views are selected. Dunno why it would have that effect when docked, but in vanilla trunk, even when it's the only OXP installed, the text appears on that screen.
Ah - and probably auto shows the HUD on any other screen change, which interferes with the contracts interface trying to manage this.
Code: Select all
this.name = "HUD Vanisher";
this.version = "1.0";
this.viewDirectionChanged = function(to,from)
{
if (from === "VIEW_CUSTOM" && to !== "VIEW_CUSTOM")
{
player.ship.hudHidden = false;
return;
}
if (to === "VIEW_CUSTOM" && from !== "VIEW_CUSTOM")
{
player.ship.hudHidden = true;
return;
}
}
this.guiScreenChanged = function()
{
if(guiScreen !== "GUI_SCREEN_MAIN") // <-------- Change here.
{
player.ship.hudHidden = false;
return;
}
}
Before I added the guiScreenChanged() function, I could press v, F5, F1 and get back to the cockpit view with the HUD staying off. Just adding a not docked check should fix it:-
if (guiScreen !== "GUI_SCREEN_MAIN"
&& !player.ship.isDocked)
Re: Alternative Contracts Interface
Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 1:11 pm
by Eric Walch
In 1.76 does guiScreenChanged()
not trigger for missionscreens, because there was no reason for an oxp to react. In trunk guiScreenChanged()
now fires also for missionscreens, so it becomes more important for an oxp to check which page is on display.