in
either viewer since ancient times and should therefore cause no ill effects.
Thanks,
Cron Stardust
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/504/#review1060
---
Ship it!
Looks good to me. The only issue I can see is
On June 30, 2011, 11:02 a.m., Vadim ProductEngine wrote:
indra/newview/llpanelwearing.cpp, lines 297-302
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/370/diff/3/?file=3241#file3241line297
Looks a bit confusing.
Lance Corrimal wrote:
but it's elegant!
Just needs some parens:
text +=
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/199/
---
(Updated April 4, 2011, 10:34 a.m.)
Review request for Viewer.
Changes
:34 a.m., Cron Stardust wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/199/
---
(Updated April 4, 2011, 10:34 a.m
On April 4, 2011, 4:39 p.m., Cron Stardust wrote:
Huh.. long winded speech became dust on pressing publish... Here goes again:
- Cron
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com
On March 17, 2011, 4:50 a.m., Vadim ProductEngine wrote:
indra/newview/llnetmap.cpp, lines 473-474
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/197/diff/4/?file=1208#file1208line473
Please move these numbers to settings.
Those two should be CHAT_NORMAL_RADIUS and CHAT_SHOUT_RADIUS
*POSITION_MOTION_THRESHOLD))
Cron Stardust wrote:
Oz, I was thinking along those lines (creating or changing the constant,)
but I wasn't sure if it would be within the scope of this. After further
thought, and evaluating the input thus far, I've come to the conclusion that
it is within
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/199/#review453
---
On March 12, 2011, 11:54 p.m., Cron Stardust wrote
it
QSL: I'm on it! :D
- Cron
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/199/#review444
---
On March 12, 2011, 6:33 a.m., Cron
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/199/
---
(Updated March 12, 2011, 11:54 p.m.)
Review request for Viewer.
Changes
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/196/
---
Review request for Viewer.
Summary
---
Simple change from a
On None, Oz Linden wrote:
indra/newview/lltexturecache.cpp, line 1439
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/172/diff/1/?file=1043#file1043line1439
This was the crash - note that it is exactly the same condition that
would normally get you out of the loop above.
Any idea why this
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/172/#review413
---
As Thickbrick just noted on OSDev, this looks to be practically
On Jan. 21, 2011, 3:44 a.m., Boroondas Gupte wrote:
indra/newview/skins/default/xui/en/menu_bottomtray.xml, lines 11-13
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/113/diff/1/?file=620#file620line11
Begin XML comments with just !-- and end them with --, not
!-- and --.
Typically SGML/XML
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/112/#review210
---
Looks like you are only preventing the button from drawing and
On Jan. 20, 2011, 10:45 a.m., Cron Stardust wrote:
Looks like you are only preventing the button from drawing and working, but
not actually /removing/ it from the tray. Have you hunted down the code
that is used to remove tray buttons when the tray is right-clicked on and
an item
On Jan. 20, 2011, 10:45 a.m., Cron Stardust wrote:
Looks like you are only preventing the button from drawing and working, but
not actually /removing/ it from the tray. Have you hunted down the code
that is used to remove tray buttons when the tray is right-clicked on and
an item
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/90/#review204
---
Ship it!
Thanks for the clarification! Looks good to me.
- Cron
On Jan. 18, 2011, 12:09 p.m., Merov Linden wrote:
indra/newview/lltexturecache.cpp, line 1595
http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/90/diff/1/?file=413#file413line1595
validate_idx being used in a test later, it's not just for
(validate_idx == 0) that the behavior will be different.
On 2010-12-06 08:33:21, Seth ProductEngine wrote:
Looks good for a first version of the task implementation, considering the
issues mentioned in the description.
Agreed. The code looks clean. (As expected from the pro's! :D ) Thought I had
found a style issue, but double checked the
On 2010-12-01 21:26:12, Cron Stardust wrote:
Based on the logic of the removed break, line 1192 of the fixed file:
idleTimer.getElapsedTimeF64() = max_idle_time
should be
idleTimer.getElapsedTimeF64() max_idle_time
The variable S32 pending; is redeclared on line 1613
22 matches
Mail list logo
