[Warzone-dev] Re: [Warzone-commits] r592 - in /trunk: lib/script/chat_parser.y lib/script/parse.h lib/script/script_lexer.l lib/script/script_parser.y src/scriptfuncs.c src/scriptfuncs.h src/scripttab
Am Dienstag, 2. Januar 2007 21:12 schrieb Roman: Author: troman Date: Tue Jan 2 21:12:14 2007 New Revision: 592 URL: http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/warzone?rev=592view=rev Log: -Implemented C-like #include preprocessor directive for the scripting engine, can be used up to depth of MAX_SCR_INCLUDE_DEPTH. Unlike C counterpart main purpose is to reuse executable and non-executable code. Example: #include multiplay/skirmish/my_include.slo -Implemented C-like #define preprocessor directive. Nested macros allowed with up to depth of MAX_SCR_MACRO_DEPTH. -Added a script function for a fast feature iteration (returns burning as well as non-burning oil resources) -Replaced some custom Pumpkin routines with default FLEX routines -Some cleanups Modified: trunk/lib/script/chat_parser.y trunk/lib/script/parse.h trunk/lib/script/script_lexer.l This one seems to create a problem, but I don't exactly know why: ../lib/script/script_lexer.l: In function ‘scriptSetInputBuffer’: ../lib/script/script_lexer.l:733: error: invalid lvalue in assignment The line it means is apparently: YY_CURRENT_BUFFER = yy_scan_bytes(pBuffer, size); YY_CURRENT_BUFFER is defined to: /* We provide macros for accessing buffer states in case in the * future we want to put the buffer states in a more general * scanner state. * * Returns the top of the stack, or NULL. */ #define YY_CURRENT_BUFFER ( (yy_buffer_stack) \ ? (yy_buffer_stack)[(yy_buffer_stack_top)] \ : NULL) Is there perhaps a function to handle those assignments via a Flex function? If I search for YY_CURRENT_BUFFER in the created lex.c file, I also find YY_CURRENT_BUFFER_LVALUE which is refrenced by several functions which seem to deal with creation of buffers. Also it seems as if Flex has a buffer of YY_BUF_SIZE by default and doesn't need to have the whole file in the buffer... (There seem to be some input streams used.) --Dennis pgp6eOyjADOMr.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] Re: [Warzone-commits] r592 - in /trunk: lib/script/chat_parser.y lib/script/parse.h lib/script/script_lexer.l lib/script/script_parser.y src/scriptfuncs.c src/scriptfuncs.h src/scrip
Am Donnerstag, 4. Januar 2007 13:41 schrieb Dennis Schridde: Am Dienstag, 2. Januar 2007 21:12 schrieb Roman: Author: troman Date: Tue Jan 2 21:12:14 2007 New Revision: 592 URL: http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/warzone?rev=592view=rev Log: -Implemented C-like #include preprocessor directive for the scripting engine, can be used up to depth of MAX_SCR_INCLUDE_DEPTH. Unlike C counterpart main purpose is to reuse executable and non-executable code. Example: #include multiplay/skirmish/my_include.slo -Implemented C-like #define preprocessor directive. Nested macros allowed with up to depth of MAX_SCR_MACRO_DEPTH. -Added a script function for a fast feature iteration (returns burning as well as non-burning oil resources) -Replaced some custom Pumpkin routines with default FLEX routines -Some cleanups Modified: trunk/lib/script/chat_parser.y trunk/lib/script/parse.h trunk/lib/script/script_lexer.l This one seems to create a problem, but I don't exactly know why: ../lib/script/script_lexer.l: In function ‘scriptSetInputBuffer’: ../lib/script/script_lexer.l:733: error: invalid lvalue in assignment The line it means is apparently: YY_CURRENT_BUFFER = yy_scan_bytes(pBuffer, size); YY_CURRENT_BUFFER is defined to: /* We provide macros for accessing buffer states in case in the * future we want to put the buffer states in a more general * scanner state. * * Returns the top of the stack, or NULL. */ #define YY_CURRENT_BUFFER ( (yy_buffer_stack) \ ? (yy_buffer_stack)[(yy_buffer_stack_top)] \ : NULL) Is there perhaps a function to handle those assignments via a Flex function? If I search for YY_CURRENT_BUFFER in the created lex.c file, I also find YY_CURRENT_BUFFER_LVALUE which is refrenced by several functions which seem to deal with creation of buffers. Also it seems as if Flex has a buffer of YY_BUF_SIZE by default and doesn't need to have the whole file in the buffer... (There seem to be some input streams used.) This fix does NOT work: Index: lib/script/script_lexer.l === --- lib/script/script_lexer.l (revision 594) +++ lib/script/script_lexer.l (working copy) @@ -729,7 +729,8 @@ scr__flush_buffer( YY_CURRENT_BUFFER ); //yy_scan_string(pBuffer); - YY_CURRENT_BUFFER = yy_scan_bytes(pBuffer, size); + if (yy_buffer_stack != NULL) + YY_CURRENT_BUFFER_LVALUE = yy_scan_bytes(pBuffer, size); } void scriptGetErrorData(int *pLine, char **ppText) Without the if, it segfaults, with the if it gets into an infinite loop. --Dennis pgpqdbz6DUtgA.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
[Warzone-dev] Re: [Warzone-commits] r596 - /trunk/data/mp/stats/weapons.txt
Am Donnerstag, 4. Januar 2007 15:42 schrieb Dennis Schridde: Author: devurandom Date: Thu Jan 4 15:42:40 2007 New Revision: 596 URL: http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/warzone?rev=596view=rev Log: Multiplayer Command Turrets can now attack/mark air targets. This makes it sensible to attach AA weapons to commanders for defensive purposes. On IRC we were talking about multiple turrets for commanders. There were 2 ideas: 1. One offensive and one defensive turret. You can control the offensive one and the defensive one tries to defend the commander and therefore marks defensive targets. Some it has to be choosen which target a groupmember wants to choose. (Can I better defend my commander or should I rather use his offensive recommendation?) Maybe a target can additionally marked as urgent, in cases where the commander droid is like to get destroyed by that unit soon. 2. One ground and one air turret. The attached AA units obey orders from the air turret, while the others obey those from the ground turret. This follows the usual rules for target selection. (Use droid-target if possible: Commander AA turret can't attack ground units, so it will choose a better target. This can then be also attacked by the attached AA units. Same applies for ground turret / ground units.) 2 is probably easier to implement, while 1 simulates a much higher inteligency of the commander. What do you think? --Dennis pgpeKbV3ogWGt.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] multiple commander targetting
The Watermelon schreef: On IRC we were talking about multiple turrets for commanders. There were 2 ideas: 1. One offensive and one defensive turret. You can control the offensive one and the defensive one tries to defend the commander and therefore marks defensive targets. Some it has to be choosen which target a groupmember wants to choose. (Can I better defend my commander or should I rather use his offensive recommendation?) Maybe a target can additionally marked as urgent, in cases where the commander droid is like to get destroyed by that unit soon. I think the groupmember's target acquisition is completely 'take over' by the commander,all groupmember will always try to choose commander's primary target 'psTarget[0]',and I dont think this can be easily changed... 2. One ground and one air turret. The attached AA units obey orders from the air turret, while the others obey those from the ground turret. This follows the usual rules for target selection. (Use droid-target if possible: Commander AA turret can't attack ground units, so it will choose a better target. This can then be also attacked by the attached AA units. Same applies for ground turret / ground units.) 2 is probably easier to implement, while 1 simulates a much higher inteligency of the commander. What do you think? --Dennis same problem as '1',imo the commander in wz is a squad leader rather than a commander(the human player is the commander),so some primitive artificial intelligence should be sufficient,e.g:attack/retreat like a wolf pack,and I always think commander will be alot useful if a commander can 'lead' tons of weak units like scavenger infantry. I'll fiddle with commander a bit after I finish the wzStats converter,'finite ammo',airfield and navy features... So if I understand, currently groupmembers of a commander simply `copy' the commander's primary target? If it would be possible to simply copy an entire array with commander-assigned targets (e.g. ground air) would it then be possible to select the best suitable target from that array? Optionally it might then probably be nice to have a bool for every of those targets which tells whether that target is currently firing at the commander. -- Giel signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] Re: [Warzone-commits] r592 - in /trunk:lib/script/chat_parser.y lib/script/parse.hlib/script/script_lexer.l lib/script/script_parser.ysrc/scriptfuncs.c src/scriptfuncs.h src/scriptta
This one seems to create a problem, but I don't exactly know why: ../lib/script/script_lexer.l: In function ‘scriptSetInputBuffer’: ../lib/script/script_lexer.l:733: error: invalid lvalue in assignment The line it means is apparently: YY_CURRENT_BUFFER = yy_scan_bytes(pBuffer, size); YY_CURRENT_BUFFER is defined to: /* We provide macros for accessing buffer states in case in the * future we want to put the buffer states in a more general * scanner state. * * Returns the top of the stack, or NULL. */ #define YY_CURRENT_BUFFER ( (yy_buffer_stack) \ ? (yy_buffer_stack)[(yy_buffer_stack_top)] \ : NULL) Should be fixed in r598. Looks like some inconsistancies between different FLEX implementations. GnuWin32 flex defines it as a pointer to a yy_buffer_state structure. Is there perhaps a function to handle those assignments via a Flex function? If I search for YY_CURRENT_BUFFER in the created lex.c file, I also find YY_CURRENT_BUFFER_LVALUE which is refrenced by several functions which seem to deal with creation of buffers. Also it seems as if Flex has a buffer of YY_BUF_SIZE by default and doesn't need to have the whole file in the buffer... (There seem to be some input streams used.) Flex can't use physfs for input. Maybe by rewriting some cryptic macros, which is probably not worth it. Just setting FLEX buffer size to YY_BUF_SIZE would result in a crash, since it is not FLEX that is taking care of the input in our case. Troman --Dennis ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] multiple commander targetting
Yes, but it will still be limited to only a few (lets say three at max?) targets, which is already an advantage. Then secondly: having two target types (i.e. ground/air) really shouldn't be a problem in firefocussing since an AA gun simply can't fire at ground targets (except for stuff like assault gun etc.). -- Giel iirc the commanders just choose the 'bestTarget' for its laser designator(1 damage per projectile...),so basically the targets chosen by the commander automatically is not suitable for most group members,and you cannot assign more than one targets with commander manually. ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] Re: [Warzone-commits] r596 -/trunk/data/mp/stats/weapons.txt
I don't think it is a good idea to combine different weapon types, like AA/Arty/Direct weapons on a single unit, unless we offer player a way to assign targets separately for each turret, which we currently can't (and which is probably not trivial unit-ai-wise). I'm sure when the multi-turret feature is released one of the first requests will be such a feature though. Manual-assign targets will be too complex for players,with 1 target you just select your unit first then left-click on the enemy unit/building and your 'manual-target-assignment' is done,while with multiple weapons you have to do this number of DROID_MAXWEAPS times,not to mention some weird keycombo that is needed to pressed while doing that... (A bit offtopic) If we are to implement such a feature I can think of a following implementation: we enumerate either droid turret slots or turret types: AA/Direct weapons/Indirect weapons/Service (ie repair turret/construction turret etc). If we enumerate turret slots, the player selects units then presses alt+number to select turret slot and then he chooses target for selected turrets. This way one could put direct weapons on turret slot 1 and AA weapons on slot 2. Pressing alt+2 would mark AA weapons of the selected units as selected turret. In case of weapon type enumeration, _all_ AA weapon slots would be selected ragardless of their slot index, if player presses alt+AA_WEAPON_TYPE_INDEX. That still doesn't eliminate conflicting situation between different weapons though. Maybe marking first weapon slot as default one (or the last slot that was given a new target) would solve it. Troman yep we need a main/default weapon_slot to control the movement of the droid(currently using '0'). The weapon combo a droid is a bit messy for current wz,the idea of multi-weapon/multi-target is to improve the combat capacity vs multiple different types of targets of a droid with zero/little human player 'intervention'.In 'stock' wz it seems there is only 1 'type' of target(all units are 'droids' and certain weapons are not exceptionally good vs certain units/armor or completely useless vs certain units/armor,e.g:mg's just 'counter' everything in game),so this is not very useful imo. I am not sure if combinating 'utility' turret and 'combat' turret is a good idea or not,since the 'utility' turret will have always to be '0' due to the droid type checks(DROID_CONTRUCT,DROID_REPAIR,DROID_WEAPON etc) ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
