#bitfighter IRC Log

IRC Log for 2012-10-22

Timestamps are in GMT/BST.

00:00:49 raptor mine has better virtualization tech, though
00:00:52 iKoda has joined
00:00:57 raptor yours is missing Intel VT-d?
00:01:01 raptor http://ark.intel.com/products/53446/Intel-Core-i5-2320-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_30-GHz
00:01:03 raptor ^^ yours
00:01:18 raptor but besides that, yours can process better I think
00:07:40 iKoda_ has joined
00:10:26 raptor be right back...
00:10:30 raptor Quit ()
00:10:49 iKoda_ Quit (Client Quit)
00:11:11 iKoda Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
00:27:03 sam686 the vt-x virtualization of my i5 CPU makes virtualbox much faster to use now with ability to virtualize more then one CPU (which I was stuck at one CPU only for my old Pentium D and Pentium 4)
00:43:47 raptor has joined
00:43:47 ChanServ sets mode +o raptor
00:44:00 raptor back briefly - i'm trying to see if i can overclock my CPU..
00:45:07 sam686 trying to make your computer faster then mine?
00:45:12 raptor yes
00:45:14 raptor :)
00:45:21 raptor actually
00:45:43 raptor i saw from the specs that the exact same CPU can go up to 3.33 GHz with no modifications
00:46:12 raptor so i figured i have to figure out how to change the multiplier...
00:46:22 raptor because the bios doesn't support it...
00:47:21 sam686 One time, I did actually overclocked Pentium D 2.8 GHz to 3.0 GHz with no problems, by adjusting the front side bus only.. but Pentium D is still quite slow compared  to my intel i5
00:49:05 sam686 I did also overclock my graphics card plugged into Pentium D computer.  but I should know that speeding up my Graphics does not speed up compiling..
00:49:39 sam686 overclock graphics is sometimes fun: random snow appears when too fast..
00:50:03 sam686 overclock CPU too much only freezes computer..
00:51:16 raptor ha
00:51:19 raptor i've seen that happen
01:19:45 raptor Quit (Quit: Page closed)
01:35:24 raptor has joined
01:35:24 ChanServ sets mode +o raptor
02:17:08 raptor i cleaned out the bug list
02:17:12 raptor much shorter now
02:17:26 raptor running bug list
02:17:34 raptor and added the script one
02:55:26 raptor Quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
03:09:37 raptor has joined
03:09:37 ChanServ sets mode +o raptor
03:09:54 raptor ok, i fixed (I think) all the Lua crashing problems with missing scripts
03:10:09 BFLogBot Commit: a2ea81d8d4b1 | Author: buckyballreaction | Message: Be more robust with Lua environment setup.  Fixes various segfaults if the interpreter fails to be created 
03:10:20 raptor and now good night!
03:13:22 sam686 ok..
03:13:40 raptor Quit (Client Quit)
06:03:42 sam686 has left
07:50:18 watusimoto has joined
07:50:18 ChanServ sets mode +o watusimoto
07:51:06 LordDVG has joined
08:33:50 LordDVG Quit (Remote host closed the connection)
12:58:00 raptor has joined
12:58:00 ChanServ sets mode +o raptor
13:04:23 raptor good day!
14:27:36 watusimoto hey there
14:27:45 watusimoto a quick question I thought of this morning
14:28:13 watusimoto in my new lua stuff, if you add a turret or ff that is not near a wall, it gets created floating in the air
14:28:25 watusimoto (if it is near a wall, it snaps as expected)
14:29:09 watusimoto the question is do you think we should 1) allow this   2) delete unsnapped turrets silently   3) throw an error ?
14:56:56 raptor hi
14:57:03 raptor sorry, fell asleep at the keyboard
14:57:32 raptor watusimoto: i think it should not be placed - and a message thrown
15:04:30 raptor there is a canDeployEngineerable or something like that somewhere for players to engineer them - could that be possible used?
15:29:52 raptor ok, have to go take an exam, be back later..
15:29:54 raptor Quit ()
16:58:45 watusimoto Quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
17:18:03 Watusimoto has joined
18:14:04 BFLogBot Commit: 1db5d05fd8e2 | Author: watusimoto | Message: More lua functionality 
18:14:05 BFLogBot Commit: f4412d9b9dd2 | Author: watusimoto | Message: Merge 
18:14:07 BFLogBot Commit: 3b1bb923c029 | Author: watusimoto | Message: Let Lua see Mines as Mines not MineItems. 
18:14:08 BFLogBot Commit: e4b4194c8ce9 | Author: watusimoto | Message: Fix Ship constructor 
18:14:10 BFLogBot Commit: 538c8b84aba4 | Author: watusimoto | Message: Probably has no impact, but call parent constructor 
18:28:21 Watusimoto Quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
18:37:07 raptor has joined
18:37:07 ChanServ sets mode +o raptor
18:40:28 raptor hello lonely me
19:12:40 Watusimoto has joined
20:12:47 raptor did you see i shortened the bug list
20:13:13 raptor the running bug list - i cleaned out all the completed ones
20:18:22 Watusimoto great
20:18:55 Watusimoto so I think I may disagree about the turrets/ffps
20:19:02 raptor ?
20:19:03 raptor oh
20:19:08 Watusimoto I agree on the need for a "canMountHere()" function
20:19:11 Watusimoto or whatever
20:19:16 raptor you mean adding from a Lua script
20:19:18 raptor ok
20:19:27 Watusimoto but I think scrips should be freer to do things not normally possible
20:19:43 Watusimoto or at least we shouldn;t drive ourselves crazy trying to limit them
20:19:44 raptor ok
20:19:51 raptor i can agree with that
20:20:00 Watusimoto for example, you can use a script to add a projectile and make it go at any aribtrary speed
20:20:10 raptor ha!  that's great
20:20:16 Watusimoto and you can change its direction and make it go around and chase someone
20:20:41 Watusimoto you could code a custom seeker based on a triple bullet, for example
20:20:48 Watusimoto totally ineficcient, but possible
20:21:01 raptor ok, are you thinking about being able to specify an angle for a free-floating FF?
20:21:07 Watusimoto no
20:21:16 Watusimoto I'm just thinking of not worrying about it
20:21:20 raptor ok
20:21:25 raptor i can agree with that, too
20:21:28 raptor :)
20:21:39 Watusimoto of providing the tools to do it right, but letting people do stupid things if that's what they do
20:21:51 raptor yes
20:21:54 Watusimoto I may change my mind if anyone actually does this :-0
20:21:59 raptor ok, you have persuaded me
20:22:22 raptor (can you tell I wasn't concrete in my stance?)
20:22:43 Watusimoto actually, what happens if you tinker with a level file to make an unmounted turret?
20:22:47 Watusimoto checking...
20:23:41 Watusimoto in processArguments...
20:23:43 Watusimoto    if(argc >= 4)
20:23:43 Watusimoto    {
20:23:43 Watusimoto       mHealRate = atoi(argv[3]);
20:23:43 Watusimoto       mHealTimer.setPeriod(mHealRate * 1000);
20:23:43 Watusimoto    }
20:23:44 Watusimoto    findMountPoint(game, pos);
20:23:47 Watusimoto    return true;
20:23:51 Watusimoto (most of this is for context)
20:23:59 Watusimoto we run findMountPoint, and then return
20:24:13 Watusimoto when adding from levelgen:
20:24:26 Watusimoto S32 EngineeredItem::setGeom(lua_State *L)
20:24:26 Watusimoto {
20:24:26 Watusimoto    S32 retVal = Parent::setGeom(L);
20:24:26 Watusimoto    findMountPoint(Game::getAddTarget(), getPos());
20:24:26 Watusimoto    return retVal;
20:24:26 Watusimoto }
20:24:32 Watusimoto I think it's the same thing
20:25:10 Watusimoto in both cases we run findMountPoint, and in neither case do we check any return values or whatever
20:25:22 raptor interesting
20:25:37 Watusimoto oh, and in turret constructor
20:25:38 raptor tangent:  addToGame disappeared, huh?
20:25:38 Watusimoto Turret::Turret(lua_State *L)
20:25:38 Watusimoto {
20:25:38 Watusimoto    initialize();
20:25:38 Watusimoto    if(L)
20:25:39 Watusimoto       findMountPoint(Game::getAddTarget(), getPos());
20:25:41 Watusimoto }
20:25:44 Watusimoto same thing
20:26:09 raptor uhhh...
20:26:29 Watusimoto so if we wanted to change that, we would probably have findMountPoint return false if it couldn;t mount the sucker, then have the caller take action
20:26:31 raptor new bug:  i always spawn at 0,0 when loading a level since your latest push
20:26:39 Watusimoto oh goodie
20:26:52 Watusimoto I noticed that last night, then promptly forgot
20:27:08 raptor i don't mind leaving the engineerables as they are for now..
20:27:10 Watusimoto so it was not my latest push, but probably a recent one
20:27:28 Watusimoto I think I've finished the lua stuff for all point items
20:27:39 Watusimoto we have at least partially functioning constructors
20:28:01 Watusimoto though I'll let the constructors take params after the release
20:28:33 Watusimoto so point objects are probably half our total objects, maybe more... so good progress!
20:30:43 raptor yes
20:31:37 raptor question:  looking at your commits, i couldn't help but notice that lots of constructors are passing values to parent constructors via  :
20:31:53 raptor not ones that you've made, but old code
20:32:01 raptor why do we do that?
20:32:16 raptor Ship() : MoveItem(someMember, otherMember)
20:37:00 Watusimoto ah, that passes values on to the parent constructor
20:37:16 raptor yes, i mean, i know the use cases, but it seems messier
20:37:24 Watusimoto messier than what?
20:37:37 Watusimoto than remimplementing the movitem logic in all children classes?
20:37:51 raptor than just setting the parent's protected members in the child's constructor
20:38:07 Watusimoto yes, but then you have to repeat that code in all the children
20:39:14 raptor doesn't each child call the full parent constructor?
20:39:34 raptor maybe i have a fundamental misunderstanding of how c++ works..
20:40:36 Watusimoto yes, but if you don't specify any arguments, the parent is called with the default params
20:40:55 Watusimoto if you want to pass a vlaue to the parent, you need to do it via that mechanism
20:44:02 raptor what if the parent uses that value to just set a protected member?  couldn't the child just set that itself directly?
20:44:18 raptor it wouldn't need to clutter the constructor up, then..
20:46:13 Watusimoto if the parent sets a protected member, the child could do that.  But then the child would need to have the setting code, as well as the parent, as well as any other children around
20:47:44 raptor so what you're saying, if Ship() sets mMass (part of parent MoveItem or whatever) to 1.0 in it's constructor, then Robot() which is a child of Ship doesn't have that value set?
20:48:28 raptor as opposed to using the mechanism we're talking about - Ship() : MoveItem(1.0)...
20:51:05 raptor i thought, and i may be wrong, that Robot() -> calls the full constructor of Ship() which calls the full constructor of MoveItem()
20:51:14 raptor and now i think i'm wrong, according to what you say
20:52:47 Watusimoto I don't think that's what i mean
20:53:00 Watusimoto if ship sets mMass then robot will get that value too
20:53:13 raptor ok
20:53:51 Watusimoto but if ship and robots have different mass, and ship constructor takes mass as a param, then you can pass mass up from robot to ship if you don;t want to set it seperately in ship and robot
20:54:26 raptor ok
20:54:37 Watusimoto this makes more sense if the setter is more complex, but the general pattern seems to be a good one -- funel the values into a single set statement
20:54:58 Watusimoto some of the things, like passing mass around, are just silly
20:55:02 raptor yes
20:55:10 raptor and i think i've seen mostly silly things..
20:55:11 Watusimoto we do it for historical reasons, not because it makes sense
20:55:19 raptor ok
20:55:38 raptor that answers my question well enough, then
20:55:43 raptor thanks
20:56:32 Watusimoto ok; and in some cases it actually is more efficient
20:56:47 Watusimoto liek when you have a referenced object, like Pos
20:56:55 Watusimoto like Point pos that is
20:57:21 raptor so you're not constantly copying it from constructor to constructor?
20:57:35 Watusimoto if you construct without specifying pos, you get a default point, and then you have to set it, which effectivley runs the setting stuff twice (once for default, once for value you want)
20:57:50 Watusimoto you pass as a reference, so it's not bad
20:57:56 raptor ah ok
20:58:10 Watusimoto I;ve been upgrading our constructors to take const Point &p instead of Point
20:58:16 raptor oh good
20:58:19 Watusimoto to reduce that inefficiency
20:58:30 Watusimoto my checkins from earlier this evening have some of that
20:58:44 raptor yes, which is what sparked my questino
20:58:47 Watusimoto because I've been working on the constructors, it seemed like a good time
20:58:47 raptor *question
20:58:58 raptor sounds good
21:02:10 BFLogBot Commit: ef2fa5aba033 | Author: watusimoto | Message: Create mechanism for determining which items a script can add to the editor, fix a few bugs 
21:02:11 BFLogBot Commit: 33b9953f96a9 | Author: watusimoto | Message: Whitespace 
21:17:31 Watusimoto are engineered teleporters in 017, or are they new to 018?
21:17:37 raptor they are new
21:17:43 Watusimoto wow
21:17:46 raptor this is a bigger release than we first had in mind..
21:17:48 Watusimoto lots of big new features
21:17:50 Watusimoto yes
21:18:02 Watusimoto perhaps biggest ever, in terms of significant game changes
21:18:18 raptor yeah, pretty crazy...
21:18:27 Watusimoto and, I think, all of the new features are solid
21:18:27 raptor energy regen
21:18:34 raptor seeker
21:18:35 Watusimoto certainly
21:18:41 raptor SUPERVISOR SCRIPT ACTIVATE
21:18:45 raptor sort of..
21:30:29 raptor i'm thinking...  we need to do another level design contest after the release...
21:48:00 Watusimoto yes
21:48:42 raptor I was inspired by some of the levels Quartz has been making..  he showed me quite a few new ones a couple nights ago
21:49:05 raptor he also likes dungeons, and can't wait for the fabled dungeon mode...
21:52:42 Watusimoto ah yes
21:52:47 Watusimoto fables...
21:52:50 Watusimoto ok, heading to bed
21:53:02 Watusimoto one last checiing coming, fixes render @0,0
21:53:16 BFLogBot Commit: 0eee32d51af8 | Author: watusimoto | Message: Fix ship spawning at (0,0) 
21:53:22 Watusimoto hasta manana
21:54:18 raptor night!
21:58:50 Watusimoto Quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
21:59:10 raptor Quit ()
23:38:38 raptor has joined
23:38:38 ChanServ sets mode +o raptor

Index Search ←Prev date Next date→

These logs were automatically created by BFLogBot on irc.freenode.net.

00:00:49	raptor	mine has better virtualization tech, though
00:00:52		iKoda has joined
00:00:57	raptor	yours is missing Intel VT-d?
00:01:01	raptor	http://ark.intel.com/products/53446/Intel-Core-i5-2320-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_30-GHz
00:01:03	raptor	^^ yours
00:01:18	raptor	but besides that, yours can process better I think
00:07:40		iKoda_ has joined
00:10:26	raptor	be right back...
00:10:30		raptor Quit ()
00:10:49		iKoda_ Quit (Client Quit)
00:11:11		iKoda Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
00:27:03	sam686	the vt-x virtualization of my i5 CPU makes virtualbox much faster to use now with ability to virtualize more then one CPU (which I was stuck at one CPU only for my old Pentium D and Pentium 4)
00:43:47		raptor has joined
00:43:47		ChanServ sets mode +o raptor
00:44:00	raptor	back briefly - i'm trying to see if i can overclock my CPU..
00:45:07	sam686	trying to make your computer faster then mine?
00:45:12	raptor	yes
00:45:14	raptor	:)
00:45:21	raptor	actually
00:45:43	raptor	i saw from the specs that the exact same CPU can go up to 3.33 GHz with no modifications
00:46:12	raptor	so i figured i have to figure out how to change the multiplier...
00:46:22	raptor	because the bios doesn't support it...
00:47:21	sam686	One time, I did actually overclocked Pentium D 2.8 GHz to 3.0 GHz with no problems, by adjusting the front side bus only.. but Pentium D is still quite slow compared to my intel i5
00:49:05	sam686	I did also overclock my graphics card plugged into Pentium D computer. but I should know that speeding up my Graphics does not speed up compiling..
00:49:39	sam686	overclock graphics is sometimes fun: random snow appears when too fast..
00:50:03	sam686	overclock CPU too much only freezes computer..
00:51:16	raptor	ha
00:51:19	raptor	i've seen that happen
01:19:45		raptor Quit (Quit: Page closed)
01:35:24		raptor has joined
01:35:24		ChanServ sets mode +o raptor
02:17:08	raptor	i cleaned out the bug list
02:17:12	raptor	much shorter now
02:17:26	raptor	running bug list
02:17:34	raptor	and added the script one
02:55:26		raptor Quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
03:09:37		raptor has joined
03:09:37		ChanServ sets mode +o raptor
03:09:54	raptor	ok, i fixed (I think) all the Lua crashing problems with missing scripts
03:10:09		BFLogBot Commit: a2ea81d8d4b1 \| Author: buckyballreaction \| Message: Be more robust with Lua environment setup. Fixes various segfaults if the interpreter fails to be created
03:10:20	raptor	and now good night!
03:13:22	sam686	ok..
03:13:40		raptor Quit (Client Quit)
06:03:42		sam686 has left
07:50:18		watusimoto has joined
07:50:18		ChanServ sets mode +o watusimoto
07:51:06		LordDVG has joined
08:33:50		LordDVG Quit (Remote host closed the connection)
12:58:00		raptor has joined
12:58:00		ChanServ sets mode +o raptor
13:04:23	raptor	good day!
14:27:36	watusimoto	hey there
14:27:45	watusimoto	a quick question I thought of this morning
14:28:13	watusimoto	in my new lua stuff, if you add a turret or ff that is not near a wall, it gets created floating in the air
14:28:25	watusimoto	(if it is near a wall, it snaps as expected)
14:29:09	watusimoto	the question is do you think we should 1) allow this 2) delete unsnapped turrets silently 3) throw an error ?
14:56:56	raptor	hi
14:57:03	raptor	sorry, fell asleep at the keyboard
14:57:32	raptor	watusimoto: i think it should not be placed - and a message thrown
15:04:30	raptor	there is a canDeployEngineerable or something like that somewhere for players to engineer them - could that be possible used?
15:29:52	raptor	ok, have to go take an exam, be back later..
15:29:54		raptor Quit ()
16:58:45		watusimoto Quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
17:18:03		Watusimoto has joined
18:14:04		BFLogBot Commit: 1db5d05fd8e2 \| Author: watusimoto \| Message: More lua functionality
18:14:05		BFLogBot Commit: f4412d9b9dd2 \| Author: watusimoto \| Message: Merge
18:14:07		BFLogBot Commit: 3b1bb923c029 \| Author: watusimoto \| Message: Let Lua see Mines as Mines not MineItems.
18:14:08		BFLogBot Commit: e4b4194c8ce9 \| Author: watusimoto \| Message: Fix Ship constructor
18:14:10		BFLogBot Commit: 538c8b84aba4 \| Author: watusimoto \| Message: Probably has no impact, but call parent constructor
18:28:21		Watusimoto Quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
18:37:07		raptor has joined
18:37:07		ChanServ sets mode +o raptor
18:40:28	raptor	hello lonely me
19:12:40		Watusimoto has joined
20:12:47	raptor	did you see i shortened the bug list
20:13:13	raptor	the running bug list - i cleaned out all the completed ones
20:18:22	Watusimoto	great
20:18:55	Watusimoto	so I think I may disagree about the turrets/ffps
20:19:02	raptor	?
20:19:03	raptor	oh
20:19:08	Watusimoto	I agree on the need for a "canMountHere()" function
20:19:11	Watusimoto	or whatever
20:19:16	raptor	you mean adding from a Lua script
20:19:18	raptor	ok
20:19:27	Watusimoto	but I think scrips should be freer to do things not normally possible
20:19:43	Watusimoto	or at least we shouldn;t drive ourselves crazy trying to limit them
20:19:44	raptor	ok
20:19:51	raptor	i can agree with that
20:20:00	Watusimoto	for example, you can use a script to add a projectile and make it go at any aribtrary speed
20:20:10	raptor	ha! that's great
20:20:16	Watusimoto	and you can change its direction and make it go around and chase someone
20:20:41	Watusimoto	you could code a custom seeker based on a triple bullet, for example
20:20:48	Watusimoto	totally ineficcient, but possible
20:21:01	raptor	ok, are you thinking about being able to specify an angle for a free-floating FF?
20:21:07	Watusimoto	no
20:21:16	Watusimoto	I'm just thinking of not worrying about it
20:21:20	raptor	ok
20:21:25	raptor	i can agree with that, too
20:21:28	raptor	:)
20:21:39	Watusimoto	of providing the tools to do it right, but letting people do stupid things if that's what they do
20:21:51	raptor	yes
20:21:54	Watusimoto	I may change my mind if anyone actually does this :-0
20:21:59	raptor	ok, you have persuaded me
20:22:22	raptor	(can you tell I wasn't concrete in my stance?)
20:22:43	Watusimoto	actually, what happens if you tinker with a level file to make an unmounted turret?
20:22:47	Watusimoto	checking...
20:23:41	Watusimoto	in processArguments...
20:23:43	Watusimoto	if(argc >= 4)
20:23:43	Watusimoto	{
20:23:43	Watusimoto	mHealRate = atoi(argv[3]);
20:23:43	Watusimoto	mHealTimer.setPeriod(mHealRate * 1000);
20:23:43	Watusimoto	}
20:23:44	Watusimoto	findMountPoint(game, pos);
20:23:47	Watusimoto	return true;
20:23:51	Watusimoto	(most of this is for context)
20:23:59	Watusimoto	we run findMountPoint, and then return
20:24:13	Watusimoto	when adding from levelgen:
20:24:26	Watusimoto	S32 EngineeredItem::setGeom(lua_State *L)
20:24:26	Watusimoto	{
20:24:26	Watusimoto	S32 retVal = Parent::setGeom(L);
20:24:26	Watusimoto	findMountPoint(Game::getAddTarget(), getPos());
20:24:26	Watusimoto	return retVal;
20:24:26	Watusimoto	}
20:24:32	Watusimoto	I think it's the same thing
20:25:10	Watusimoto	in both cases we run findMountPoint, and in neither case do we check any return values or whatever
20:25:22	raptor	interesting
20:25:37	Watusimoto	oh, and in turret constructor
20:25:38	raptor	tangent: addToGame disappeared, huh?
20:25:38	Watusimoto	Turret::Turret(lua_State *L)
20:25:38	Watusimoto	{
20:25:38	Watusimoto	initialize();
20:25:38	Watusimoto	if(L)
20:25:39	Watusimoto	findMountPoint(Game::getAddTarget(), getPos());
20:25:41	Watusimoto	}
20:25:44	Watusimoto	same thing
20:26:09	raptor	uhhh...
20:26:29	Watusimoto	so if we wanted to change that, we would probably have findMountPoint return false if it couldn;t mount the sucker, then have the caller take action
20:26:31	raptor	new bug: i always spawn at 0,0 when loading a level since your latest push
20:26:39	Watusimoto	oh goodie
20:26:52	Watusimoto	I noticed that last night, then promptly forgot
20:27:08	raptor	i don't mind leaving the engineerables as they are for now..
20:27:10	Watusimoto	so it was not my latest push, but probably a recent one
20:27:28	Watusimoto	I think I've finished the lua stuff for all point items
20:27:39	Watusimoto	we have at least partially functioning constructors
20:28:01	Watusimoto	though I'll let the constructors take params after the release
20:28:33	Watusimoto	so point objects are probably half our total objects, maybe more... so good progress!
20:30:43	raptor	yes
20:31:37	raptor	question: looking at your commits, i couldn't help but notice that lots of constructors are passing values to parent constructors via :
20:31:53	raptor	not ones that you've made, but old code
20:32:01	raptor	why do we do that?
20:32:16	raptor	Ship() : MoveItem(someMember, otherMember)
20:37:00	Watusimoto	ah, that passes values on to the parent constructor
20:37:16	raptor	yes, i mean, i know the use cases, but it seems messier
20:37:24	Watusimoto	messier than what?
20:37:37	Watusimoto	than remimplementing the movitem logic in all children classes?
20:37:51	raptor	than just setting the parent's protected members in the child's constructor
20:38:07	Watusimoto	yes, but then you have to repeat that code in all the children
20:39:14	raptor	doesn't each child call the full parent constructor?
20:39:34	raptor	maybe i have a fundamental misunderstanding of how c++ works..
20:40:36	Watusimoto	yes, but if you don't specify any arguments, the parent is called with the default params
20:40:55	Watusimoto	if you want to pass a vlaue to the parent, you need to do it via that mechanism
20:44:02	raptor	what if the parent uses that value to just set a protected member? couldn't the child just set that itself directly?
20:44:18	raptor	it wouldn't need to clutter the constructor up, then..
20:46:13	Watusimoto	if the parent sets a protected member, the child could do that. But then the child would need to have the setting code, as well as the parent, as well as any other children around
20:47:44	raptor	so what you're saying, if Ship() sets mMass (part of parent MoveItem or whatever) to 1.0 in it's constructor, then Robot() which is a child of Ship doesn't have that value set?
20:48:28	raptor	as opposed to using the mechanism we're talking about - Ship() : MoveItem(1.0)...
20:51:05	raptor	i thought, and i may be wrong, that Robot() -> calls the full constructor of Ship() which calls the full constructor of MoveItem()
20:51:14	raptor	and now i think i'm wrong, according to what you say
20:52:47	Watusimoto	I don't think that's what i mean
20:53:00	Watusimoto	if ship sets mMass then robot will get that value too
20:53:13	raptor	ok
20:53:51	Watusimoto	but if ship and robots have different mass, and ship constructor takes mass as a param, then you can pass mass up from robot to ship if you don;t want to set it seperately in ship and robot
20:54:26	raptor	ok
20:54:37	Watusimoto	this makes more sense if the setter is more complex, but the general pattern seems to be a good one -- funel the values into a single set statement
20:54:58	Watusimoto	some of the things, like passing mass around, are just silly
20:55:02	raptor	yes
20:55:10	raptor	and i think i've seen mostly silly things..
20:55:11	Watusimoto	we do it for historical reasons, not because it makes sense
20:55:19	raptor	ok
20:55:38	raptor	that answers my question well enough, then
20:55:43	raptor	thanks
20:56:32	Watusimoto	ok; and in some cases it actually is more efficient
20:56:47	Watusimoto	liek when you have a referenced object, like Pos
20:56:55	Watusimoto	like Point pos that is
20:57:21	raptor	so you're not constantly copying it from constructor to constructor?
20:57:35	Watusimoto	if you construct without specifying pos, you get a default point, and then you have to set it, which effectivley runs the setting stuff twice (once for default, once for value you want)
20:57:50	Watusimoto	you pass as a reference, so it's not bad
20:57:56	raptor	ah ok
20:58:10	Watusimoto	I;ve been upgrading our constructors to take const Point &p instead of Point
20:58:16	raptor	oh good
20:58:19	Watusimoto	to reduce that inefficiency
20:58:30	Watusimoto	my checkins from earlier this evening have some of that
20:58:44	raptor	yes, which is what sparked my questino
20:58:47	Watusimoto	because I've been working on the constructors, it seemed like a good time
20:58:47	raptor	*question
20:58:58	raptor	sounds good
21:02:10		BFLogBot Commit: ef2fa5aba033 \| Author: watusimoto \| Message: Create mechanism for determining which items a script can add to the editor, fix a few bugs
21:02:11		BFLogBot Commit: 33b9953f96a9 \| Author: watusimoto \| Message: Whitespace
21:17:31	Watusimoto	are engineered teleporters in 017, or are they new to 018?
21:17:37	raptor	they are new
21:17:43	Watusimoto	wow
21:17:46	raptor	this is a bigger release than we first had in mind..
21:17:48	Watusimoto	lots of big new features
21:17:50	Watusimoto	yes
21:18:02	Watusimoto	perhaps biggest ever, in terms of significant game changes
21:18:18	raptor	yeah, pretty crazy...
21:18:27	Watusimoto	and, I think, all of the new features are solid
21:18:27	raptor	energy regen
21:18:34	raptor	seeker
21:18:35	Watusimoto	certainly
21:18:41	raptor	SUPERVISOR SCRIPT ACTIVATE
21:18:45	raptor	sort of..
21:30:29	raptor	i'm thinking... we need to do another level design contest after the release...
21:48:00	Watusimoto	yes
21:48:42	raptor	I was inspired by some of the levels Quartz has been making.. he showed me quite a few new ones a couple nights ago
21:49:05	raptor	he also likes dungeons, and can't wait for the fabled dungeon mode...
21:52:42	Watusimoto	ah yes
21:52:47	Watusimoto	fables...
21:52:50	Watusimoto	ok, heading to bed
21:53:02	Watusimoto	one last checiing coming, fixes render @0,0
21:53:16		BFLogBot Commit: 0eee32d51af8 \| Author: watusimoto \| Message: Fix ship spawning at (0,0)
21:53:22	Watusimoto	hasta manana
21:54:18	raptor	night!
21:58:50		Watusimoto Quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
21:59:10		raptor Quit ()
23:38:38		raptor has joined
23:38:38		ChanServ sets mode +o raptor