[Warzone-dev] Update To Kills/Rank Mechanism (Implementation)
Hello again all. I have just finished testing my patch for partial kills and have attached it to this message. I have been testing it for the last couple of hours on campaign and skirmish and all seems good. Other than having to comment out a small part of multiplay.c (with possibly unknown consequences) it all seems fine and was a nice and simple implementation. Regards, Freddie. parialKills.patch Description: Binary data ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] Push out 2.0.7?
Dennis Schridde schreef: Am Dienstag, 29. Mai 2007 schrieb Dennis Schridde: Am Dienstag, 29. Mai 2007 schrieb Dennis Schridde: Am Dienstag, 29. Mai 2007 schrieb Dennis Schridde: Am Dienstag, 15. Mai 2007 schrieb Dennis Schridde: Am Sonntag, 13. Mai 2007 schrieb The Watermelon: 2 important/stability change/fix: map_height revert by Troman and flatten imd(NULL imd crash) fixes by Per,because they were major crash problems in 2.0.6 imo. Additionaly needed: debugmode config option from r1244. This is fixed in r1404. This leaves following items to be completed: - map_height revert by Troman r1253? I am unsure about this. What does it do? Is this the fix you meant? Can someone (Watermelon maybe?) please enlighten me whether this is the fix suggested for backporting, what it does and why it needs backporting? The r1253 changes don't need to be backported to the 2.0 branch. Simply because it is a revert of a change, that never took place to the 2.0 branch in the first place. I don't know about the IMD stuff though. -- 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] Update To Kills/Rank Mechanism
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schreef: On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 16:15:17 -0400 Freddie Witherden wrote: Do units carry over rankings? I never notice much difference, they die too fast. I am not sure what you mean by carry over rankings. Could you elaborate somewhat? The experience points/rank is what I mean. If unit get lot kills in 1 mission, I never notice if same unit is any better in next mission. The only advantage high ranking units currently have is a better aiming accuracy (i.e. they have a greater chance of hitting something). -- 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] Update To Kills/Rank Mechanism
On 3 Jun 2007, at 13:50, Giel van Schijndel wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] schreef: On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 16:15:17 -0400 Freddie Witherden wrote: Do units carry over rankings? I never notice much difference, they die too fast. I am not sure what you mean by carry over rankings. Could you elaborate somewhat? The experience points/rank is what I mean. If unit get lot kills in 1 mission, I never notice if same unit is any better in next mission. The only advantage high ranking units currently have is a better aiming accuracy (i.e. they have a greater chance of hitting something). I also thought that they did slightly more damage to enemy units and took less damage themselves (ref: line 274 droid.c). Regards, Freddie. ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] Update To Kills/Rank Mechanism
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Freddie Witherden Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2007 9:18 AM To: Development list Subject: Re: [Warzone-dev] Update To Kills/Rank Mechanism On 3 Jun 2007, at 13:50, Giel van Schijndel wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] schreef: On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 16:15:17 -0400 Freddie Witherden wrote: Do units carry over rankings? I never notice much difference, they die too fast. I am not sure what you mean by carry over rankings. Could you elaborate somewhat? The experience points/rank is what I mean. If unit get lot kills in 1 mission, I never notice if same unit is any better in next mission. The only advantage high ranking units currently have is a better aiming accuracy (i.e. they have a greater chance of hitting something). I also thought that they did slightly more damage to enemy units and took less damage themselves (ref: line 274 droid.c). And of course higher ranking commanders can control more units. ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] [Warzone-commits] r1435 - /trunk/data/mp/stats/weapons.txt
On 6/3/07, Roman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: troman Date: Sun Jun 3 15:09:48 2007 New Revision: 1435 URL: http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/warzone?rev=1435view=rev Log: Balance Changes LasSat weapon: -blast radius: increased from 2 tiles to 4.5 tiles -blast radius damage: increased from 1000 to 2800 -reload time: increased from 5 mins to 8 mins -chance to hit in the blast radius: reduced from 99% to 90% NOTE: normal damage doesn't seem to have any effect on the LasSat weapon Modified: trunk/data/mp/stats/weapons.txt I think the 5th element from right to left is 'effect size',according to the source it should make the weapon effect bigger,though I am not entirely sure if changing it will have any visible effects or not. ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] [Warzone-commits] r1435 - /trunk/data/mp/stats/weapons.txt
dfvdfvdfv On 6/3/07, Roman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: troman Date: Sun Jun 3 15:09:48 2007 New Revision: 1435 URL: http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/warzone?rev=1435view=rev Log: Balance Changes LasSat weapon: -blast radius: increased from 2 tiles to 4.5 tiles -blast radius damage: increased from 1000 to 2800 -reload time: increased from 5 mins to 8 mins -chance to hit in the blast radius: reduced from 99% to 90% NOTE: normal damage doesn't seem to have any effect on the LasSat weapon Modified: trunk/data/mp/stats/weapons.txt I think the 5th element from right to left is 'effect size',according to the source it should make the weapon effect bigger,though I am not entirely sure if changing it will have any visible effects or not. I'm not sure what you want to say. Do you suggest to make the visible effects bigger? It will not have any effect on the weapon damage though, I think it only scales the visible gfx effects. -- Roman ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] [Warzone-commits] r1435 - /trunk/data/mp/stats/weapons.txt
On 6/3/07, Roman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: dfvdfvdfv On 6/3/07, Roman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: troman Date: Sun Jun 3 15:09:48 2007 New Revision: 1435 URL: http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/warzone?rev=1435view=rev Log: Balance Changes LasSat weapon: -blast radius: increased from 2 tiles to 4.5 tiles -blast radius damage: increased from 1000 to 2800 -reload time: increased from 5 mins to 8 mins -chance to hit in the blast radius: reduced from 99% to 90% NOTE: normal damage doesn't seem to have any effect on the LasSat weapon Modified: trunk/data/mp/stats/weapons.txt I think the 5th element from right to left is 'effect size',according to the source it should make the weapon effect bigger,though I am not entirely sure if changing it will have any visible effects or not. I'm not sure what you want to say. Do you suggest to make the visible effects bigger? It will not have any effect on the weapon damage though, I think it only scales the visible gfx effects. -- Roman ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev yes thats what I meant,the lassat effect radius should enlarged to reflect the increased damage radius change imo. also I wonder if you can use the powerplant destruction effects on weapons,because it seems to me it's the most stunning explosion effect in warzone... ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] [Warzone-commits] r1439 - in /trunk/src: action.c droid.c droid.h
On 6/3/07, Giel van Schijndel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Change macro CHECK_DROID into static inline function check_droid Why? - Per ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] [Warzone-commits] r1439 - in /trunk/src: action.c droid.c droid.h
On 6/3/07, Per Inge Mathisen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/3/07, Giel van Schijndel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Change macro CHECK_DROID into static inline function check_droid Why? Perhaps I should explain why it was done the way it was instead. When an assert happens in a macro, you get the line number of the macro call in the assert message, whereas if an assert happens in a function call, no matter how inlined, you get the line number of the function definition. At least with gcc. If the dumpfile works, it does not matter much, but when it does not work, it makes a great deal of difference. So unless you had a very good reason for making it inline, please put it back the way it was. - Per ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] [Warzone-commits] r1439 - in /trunk/src: action.c droid.c droid.h
Per Inge Mathisen schreef: On 6/3/07, Per Inge Mathisen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/3/07, Giel van Schijndel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Change macro CHECK_DROID into static inline function check_droid Why? Perhaps I should explain why it was done the way it was instead. When an assert happens in a macro, you get the line number of the macro call in the assert message, whereas if an assert happens in a function call, no matter how inlined, you get the line number of the function definition. At least with gcc. If the dumpfile works, it does not matter much, but when it does not work, it makes a great deal of difference. So unless you had a very good reason for making it inline, please put it back the way it was. I'm not sure but I think the gna.org mailinglist's are somehow annoyingly ignoring some of my mails and don't deliver them. Aside from that, I must admit I didn't initially thought of the assert macro's property to use line numbers and filenames. So I'll change it back to a macro. -- 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] Bison/flex errors in grammar ?
On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 06:55:31 -0400 Per Inge Mathisen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/3/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For all the asserts, is root cause error in grammar files Or is code problem? All .l .y files change from original, so is there a way to check these files for problems? Someone explain better those asserts? Which asserts? - Per The ones I include in original message. line 958 in interp.c 1080 in event.c. Those are ones that makes game unplayable in debugger, since you must hit ignore all the time. error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=51) error : Original event ID: 67 (of 114) error : Current event ID: 51 (of 114) error : Call depth : 1 error : interpRunScript: error while executing a script error : Assert in Warzone: f:\warzone_src\gna\lib\script\interp.c:958 : interpRunScript (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : eventFireCallbackTrigger: event initialisedEvent: code failed error : Assert in Warzone: f:\warzone_src\gna\lib\script\event.c:1080 : eventFireCallbackTrigger (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=51) error : Original event ID: 67 (of 114) error : Current event ID: 51 (of 114) error : Call depth : 1 -- Click here to find experienced pros to help with your home improvement project. http://tagline.hushmail.com/fc/CAaCXv1SNNRpyd7Ya1syAMEMD6gynnou/ ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] Bison/flex errors in grammar ?
On 6/3/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The ones I include in original message. What original message? It seems mails from you get threaded really badly in gmail. Often replies get a new thread for no apparent reason... line 958 in interp.c 1080 in event.c. Those are ones that makes game unplayable in debugger, since you must hit ignore all the time. Never seen it before. Is it in the bug tracker? If not, please add it with all the info you have. - Per ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] [Warzone-commits] r1440 - in /trunk: lib/netplay/netplay.h src/cmddroid.c src/cmddroid.h src/droid.c
On 6/3/07, Giel van Schijndel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: muggenhor Date: Sun Jun 3 17:51:56 2007 New Revision: 1440 URL: http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/warzone?rev=1440view=rev Log: * turn some usages of WinAPI types (*WORD) into their native C counterparts (e.g. int, unsigned int, etc.) Are you sure about that? Int and unsigned int vary in size according to the ABI. It is far better to use integers of a known size that will not change according to the system you are on. uint32_t and int32_t, for instance. ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
[Warzone-dev] [bug #9270] ASSERT from scripting errors?
URL: http://gna.org/bugs/?9270 Summary: ASSERT from scripting errors? Project: Warzone Resurrection Project Submitted by: None Submitted on: Sunday 06/03/2007 at 20:36 CEST Category: Engine: Scripting Severity: 4 - Important Priority: 5 - Normal Status: None Assigned to: None Originator Email: vs2k5 Open/Closed: Open Discussion Lock: Any Release: svn Operating System: Microsoft Windows ___ Details: For all the asserts, is root cause error in grammar files Or is code problem? All .l .y files change from original, so is there a way to check these files for problems? Someone explain better those asserts? error : Assert in Warzone: \lib\script\event.c:1080 : error : Assert in Warzone: \lib\script\interp.c:958 : These always go off every few seconds while running game in debugger. here is stderr file, error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=51) error : Original event ID: 67 (of 114) error : Current event ID: 51 (of 114) error : Call depth : 1 error : interpRunScript: error while executing a script error : Assert in Warzone: \lib\script\interp.c:958 : interpRunScript (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : eventFireCallbackTrigger: event initialisedEvent: code failed error : Assert in Warzone: \lib\script\event.c:1080 : eventFireCallbackTrigger (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=51) error : Original event ID: 67 (of 114) error : Current event ID: 51 (of 114) error : Call depth : 1 error : interpRunScript: error while executing a script error : Assert in Warzone: \lib\script\interp.c:958 : interpRunScript (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : eventFireCallbackTrigger: event initialisedEvent: code failed error : Assert in Warzone: \lib\script\event.c:1080 : eventFireCallbackTrigger (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=51) error : Original event ID: 67 (of 114) error : Current event ID: 51 (of 114) error : Call depth : 1 error : interpRunScript: error while executing a script error : Assert in Warzone: \lib\script\interp.c:958 : interpRunScript (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : eventFireCallbackTrigger: event initialisedEvent: code failed error : Assert in Warzone: \lib\script\event.c:1080 : eventFireCallbackTrigger (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=1) error : Original event ID: 1 (of 6) error : Current event ID: 1 (of 6) error : Call depth : 0 error : interpRunScript: error while executing a script error : Assert in Warzone: \lib\script\interp.c:958 : interpRunScript (FALSE), last script event: 'initialisedEventTwo' error : eventFireCallbackTrigger: event initialisedEventTwo: code failed error : Assert in Warzone: \lib\script\event.c:1080 : eventFireCallbackTrigger (FALSE), last script event: 'initialisedEventTwo' error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=0) error : Original event ID: 0 (of 6) error : Current event ID: 0 (of 6) error : Call depth : 0 error : interpRunScript: error while executing a script error : Assert in Warzone: \lib\script\interp.c:958 : interpRunScript (FALSE), last script event: 'initialisedEvent' error : eventFireCallbackTrigger: event initialisedEvent: code failed error : Assert in Warzone: \lib\script\event.c:1080 : eventFireCallbackTrigger (FALSE), last script event: 'initialisedEvent' ___ Reply to this item at: http://gna.org/bugs/?9270 ___ Message sent via/by Gna! http://gna.org/ ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] Bison/flex errors in grammar ?
On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 06:55:31 -0400 Per Inge Mathisen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/3/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For all the asserts, is root cause error in grammar files Or is code problem? All .l .y files change from original, so is there a way to check these files for problems? Someone explain better those asserts? Which asserts? - Per The ones I include in original message. line 958 in interp.c 1080 in event.c. Those are ones that makes game unplayable in debugger, since you must hit ignore all the time. error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=51) error : Original event ID: 67 (of 114) error : Current event ID: 51 (of 114) error : Call depth : 1 error : interpRunScript: error while executing a script error : Assert in Warzone: f:\warzone_src\gna\lib\script\interp.c:958 : interpRunScript (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : eventFireCallbackTrigger: event initialisedEvent: code failed error : Assert in Warzone: f:\warzone_src\gna\lib\script\event.c:1080 : eventFireCallbackTrigger (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=51) error : Original event ID: 67 (of 114) error : Current event ID: 51 (of 114) error : Call depth : 1 I just made a game with 1.10 AI and can't confirm it so far. -- Roman___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] Bison/flex errors in grammar ?
On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 14:35:36 -0400 Roman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: vs2k5 wrote: error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=51) error : Original event ID: 67 (of 114) error : Current event ID: 51 (of 114) error : Call depth : 1 error : interpRunScript: error while executing a script error : Assert in Warzone: f:\warzone_src\gna\lib\script\interp.c:958 : interpRunScript (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : eventFireCallbackTrigger: event initialisedEvent: code failed error : Assert in Warzone: f:\warzone_src\gna\lib\script\event.c:1080 : eventFireCallbackTrigger (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=51) error : Original event ID: 67 (of 114) error : Current event ID: 51 (of 114) error : Call depth : 1 I just made a game with 1.10 AI and can't confirm it so far. Did you run game from MSVC debugger? I think you said that you use MSVC? -- Click here to find experienced pros to help with your home improvement project. http://tagline.hushmail.com/fc/CAaCXv1SNNWRT7frSLbOxgOSwwSyOyb9/ ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] Bison/flex errors in grammar ?
On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 14:35:36 -0400 Roman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: vs2k5 wrote: error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=51) error : Original event ID: 67 (of 114) error : Current event ID: 51 (of 114) error : Call depth : 1 error : interpRunScript: error while executing a script error : Assert in Warzone: f:\warzone_src\gna\lib\script\interp.c:958 : interpRunScript (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : eventFireCallbackTrigger: event initialisedEvent: code failed error : Assert in Warzone: f:\warzone_src\gna\lib\script\event.c:1080 : eventFireCallbackTrigger (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=51) error : Original event ID: 67 (of 114) error : Current event ID: 51 (of 114) error : Call depth : 1 I just made a game with 1.10 AI and can't confirm it so far. Did you run game from MSVC debugger? I think you said that you use MSVC? Yes, I use MSVC in debug mode. -- Roman___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] Bison/flex errors in grammar ?
On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 14:54:26 -0400 Roman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 14:35:36 -0400 Roman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: vs2k5 wrote: error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=51) error : Original event ID: 67 (of 114) error : Current event ID: 51 (of 114) error : Call depth : 1 error : interpRunScript: error while executing a script error : Assert in Warzone: f:\warzone_src\gna\lib\script\interp.c:958 : interpRunScript (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : eventFireCallbackTrigger: event initialisedEvent: code failed error : Assert in Warzone: f:\warzone_src\gna\lib\script\event.c:1080 : eventFireCallbackTrigger (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=51) error : Original event ID: 67 (of 114) error : Current event ID: 51 (of 114) error : Call depth : 1 I just made a game with 1.10 AI and can't confirm it so far. Did you run game from MSVC debugger? I think you said that you use MSVC? Yes, I use MSVC in debug mode. -- Ok, here is how I do it. Run warzone from debug menu. Pick multiplayer. Then skirmish. Then leave everything as is. (default map, and everything else) When game loads up, 1 assert. Then while in game, those 2 asserts always show up when move screen around. I can replicate this 100% time. No, I don't have it, although I used to get error that had something to do with wall rendering on startup very often, or when I tried to move the radar. ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev -- Roman___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] [Warzone-commits] r1440 - in /trunk: lib/netplay/netplay.h src/cmddroid.c src/cmddroid.h src/droid.c
Am Sonntag, 3. Juni 2007 schrieb Ari Johnson: On 6/3/07, Giel van Schijndel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: muggenhor Date: Sun Jun 3 17:51:56 2007 New Revision: 1440 URL: http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/warzone?rev=1440view=rev Log: * turn some usages of WinAPI types (*WORD) into their native C counterparts (e.g. int, unsigned int, etc.) Are you sure about that? Int and unsigned int vary in size according to the ABI. It is far better to use integers of a known size that will not change according to the system you are on. uint32_t and int32_t, for instance. As long as you stay on the same system that should not matter, should it? Eg. if that int never reaches the borders of your system (via file or network), then it should be perfectly legal to use them... --Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] Bison/flex errors in grammar ?
On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 15:01:30 -0400 Dennis Schridde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Am Sonntag, 3. Juni 2007 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 14:54:26 -0400 Roman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 14:35:36 -0400 Roman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: vs2k5 wrote: error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=51) error : Original event ID: 67 (of 114) error : Current event ID: 51 (of 114) error : Call depth : 1 error : interpRunScript: error while executing a script error : Assert in Warzone: f:\warzone_src\gna\lib\script\interp.c:958 : interpRunScript (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : eventFireCallbackTrigger: event initialisedEvent: code failed error : Assert in Warzone: f:\warzone_src\gna\lib\script\event.c:1080 : eventFireCallbackTrigger (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=51) error : Original event ID: 67 (of 114) error : Current event ID: 51 (of 114) error : Call depth : 1 I just made a game with 1.10 AI and can't confirm it so far. Did you run game from MSVC debugger? I think you said that you use MSVC? Yes, I use MSVC in debug mode. -- Ok, here is how I do it. Run warzone from debug menu. Pick multiplayer. Then skirmish. Then leave everything as is. (default map, and everything else) When game loads up, 1 assert. Then while in game, those 2 asserts always show up when move screen around. I can replicate this 100% time. I can not confirm this. I can play for several minutes without one assert. Here is video of issue. http://www.sendspace.com/file/xl4ije It is abouts 7MB in size. Quality not best, but it too big if I go high quality. -- Click to compare life insurance rates. Great rates, quick and easy. http://tagline.hushmail.com/fc/CAaCXv1QSYKsbvIt4iDCt1CZTcctJitJ/ ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] [Warzone-commits] r1440 - in /trunk: lib/netplay/netplay.h src/cmddroid.c src/cmddroid.h src/droid.c
On 6/3/07, Dennis Schridde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Am Sonntag, 3. Juni 2007 schrieb Ari Johnson: On 6/3/07, Giel van Schijndel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: muggenhor Date: Sun Jun 3 17:51:56 2007 New Revision: 1440 URL: http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/warzone?rev=1440view=rev Log: * turn some usages of WinAPI types (*WORD) into their native C counterparts (e.g. int, unsigned int, etc.) Are you sure about that? Int and unsigned int vary in size according to the ABI. It is far better to use integers of a known size that will not change according to the system you are on. uint32_t and int32_t, for instance. As long as you stay on the same system that should not matter, should it? Eg. if that int never reaches the borders of your system (via file or network), then it should be perfectly legal to use them... Except that much of our code *does* reach a file or the network. As long as you contain it and are certain that the minimum size of the type on any system will always be enough for what the code at hand requires, then it's fine, but I have seen a few places in our code where lack of clarity on what size a given variable was caused me headaches in porting to the Mac. Just be careful. ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] [Warzone-commits] r1440 - in /trunk: lib/netplay/netplay.h src/cmddroid.c src/cmddroid.h src/droid.c
On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 15:03:14 -0400 Dennis Schridde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Am Sonntag, 3. Juni 2007 schrieb Ari Johnson: On 6/3/07, Giel van Schijndel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: muggenhor Date: Sun Jun 3 17:51:56 2007 New Revision: 1440 URL: http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/warzone?rev=1440view=rev Log: * turn some usages of WinAPI types (*WORD) into their native C counterparts (e.g. int, unsigned int, etc.) Are you sure about that? Int and unsigned int vary in size according to the ABI. It is far better to use integers of a known size that will not change according to the system you are on. uint32_t and int32_t, for instance. As long as you stay on the same system that should not matter, should it? Eg. if that int never reaches the borders of your system (via file or network), then it should be perfectly legal to use them... --Dennis It would be much safer to use u/int32_t, since nobody knows all functions that are use by network code. Then all 32 vs 64bit systems may have problems later on. -- Click to get free info on kitchen remodeling at 50% - 70% off http://tagline.hushmail.com/fc/CAaCXv1MQyEbZdLpv91jw1OiYAK4ALz5/ ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] Bison/flex errors in grammar ?
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dennis Schridde Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2007 3:02 PM To: Development list Subject: Re: [Warzone-dev] Bison/flex errors in grammar ? Am Sonntag, 3. Juni 2007 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 14:54:26 -0400 Roman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 14:35:36 -0400 Roman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: vs2k5 wrote: error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=51) error : Original event ID: 67 (of 114) error : Current event ID: 51 (of 114) error : Call depth : 1 error : interpRunScript: error while executing a script error : Assert in Warzone: f:\warzone_src\gna\lib\script\interp.c:958 : interpRunScript (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : eventFireCallbackTrigger: event initialisedEvent: code failed error : Assert in Warzone: f:\warzone_src\gna\lib\script\event.c:1080 : eventFireCallbackTrigger (FALSE), last script event: 'buildTruck' error : interpRunScript: jump out of range error : interpRunScript: *** ERROR EXIT *** (CurEvent=51) error : Original event ID: 67 (of 114) error : Current event ID: 51 (of 114) error : Call depth : 1 I just made a game with 1.10 AI and can't confirm it so far. Did you run game from MSVC debugger? I think you said that you use MSVC? Yes, I use MSVC in debug mode. -- Ok, here is how I do it. Run warzone from debug menu. Pick multiplayer. Then skirmish. Then leave everything as is. (default map, and everything else) When game loads up, 1 assert. Then while in game, those 2 asserts always show up when move screen around. I can replicate this 100% time. I can not confirm this. I can play for several minutes without one assert. I can't reproduce this either. Vs25k: when you clean build and complie, do you first manually delete all the the .h and c. script parser files in the win32 directory? Maybe you have stale lexer libraries ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] 2.0.7 again
Am Sonntag, 3. Juni 2007 schrieb Per Inge Mathisen: On 6/3/07, Dennis Schridde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know of nasty bugs which still need to be tracked down? I.e. serious crashes and the like. Anything else that needs to be backported? Do we have known bugs document somewhere? We don't but it could go into the Readme and a link to that into the release announcement. --Dennis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] Bison/flex errors in grammar ?
On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 17:14:51 -0400 Jose Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I can't reproduce this either. Vs25k: when you clean build and complie, do you first manually delete all the the .h and c. script parser files in the win32 directory? Maybe you have stale lexer libraries Yes, I do this. I also do clean. Last thing I think is ask someone to zip/rar/7z all .l .y bison/flex output files, so I can compare. Maybe it is bison/flex program cause error? -- Click to get free info on kitchen remodeling at 50% - 70% off http://tagline.hushmail.com/fc/CAaCXv1MQyEPF3LZtazva9fbVxzf9c6b/ ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
Re: [Warzone-dev] Bugreport forum
Roman schreef: Does anyone still read it? Does anyone think it is of much use and we could not send the people to the bugtracker, which also allows anonymous reports since a while? If not, I'll close it and move the reports which seem still valid into the tracker. I'd say we don't need it, bugtracker is much more convenient to use. But make sure you leave a link to the bugtracker or redirect there automaticaly, otherwise some forum users might either completely stop submitting bugreports or will start using other forums instead. I second that: just drop the forums and provide an easy to find link to the bugtracker. -- 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] [Warzone-commits] r1428 - in /trunk/src: display3d.c map.h
Per I. Mathisen schreef: Author: per Date: Fri Jun 1 21:40:18 2007 New Revision: 1428 URL: http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/warzone?rev=1428view=rev Log: Remove unused TILE_BITMASK and use INT32_MAX instead of possibly undefined INT_MAX. Modified: trunk/src/display3d.c trunk/src/map.h INT_MAX is defined to be the highest (non-negative) value a `signed int` (or just `int`) can have. INT32_MAX is the same for int32_t, so this actually makes the code non-portable. Apart from that INT_MAX is _required_ by the C-standard (I am sure of C99, I don't have the C90 document so can't check that) to be defined in limits.h. INT32_MAX on the other hand is only required when the int32_t is provided by the implementation. Whereas INT_MAX is required to be defined always (since the type `int` is required to be provided always). -- 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] [Warzone-commits] r1431 - in /trunk/src: action.c droid.c droid.h droiddef.h game.c intdisplay.c power.c statsdef.h
Per I. Mathisen schreef: Author: per Date: Sat Jun 2 18:26:41 2007 New Revision: 1431 URL: http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/warzone?rev=1431view=rev Log: Add a new assert collection CHECK_DROID(psDroid) and sprinkle it over the droid code. More carefully initialize some droid variables. Remove a ton of unused droid code. Hopefully this will make it easier to debug. Any specific reason for _not_ using an inline function? Otherwise I've got a patch at the ready. -- 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] [Warzone-commits] r1439 - in /trunk/src: action.c droid.c droid.h
Per Inge Mathisen schreef: On 6/3/07, Giel van Schijndel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Change macro CHECK_DROID into static inline function check_droid Why? Two reasons basically. First is compile-time checked type-safety. Second is that this inline is less obscure than the macro is (i.e. no multiple statements on each line, a bit more whitespace to aid in reading). -- Giel signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
