Config
Log for #openttd on 13th May 2018:
Times are UTC Toggle Colours
00:02:23  *** KouDy has quit IRC
00:07:03  *** HerzogDeXtEr has quit IRC
00:40:51  *** DDR has joined #openttd
01:02:56  *** Flygon has joined #openttd
01:05:48  *** DDR has quit IRC
01:29:38  *** Thedarkb-X40 has quit IRC
01:35:57  *** KouDy has joined #openttd
02:34:49  *** muffindrake1 has joined #openttd
02:36:41  *** muffindrake has quit IRC
02:49:39  *** glx has quit IRC
03:21:57  *** Supercheese has quit IRC
03:22:15  *** Supercheese has joined #openttd
03:51:40  *** sim-al2 is now known as Guest2552
03:51:41  *** sim-al2 has joined #openttd
03:56:09  *** Guest2552 has quit IRC
04:02:30  *** sim-al2 has quit IRC
04:06:38  *** sim-al2 has joined #openttd
04:12:51  *** cr1t1cal has joined #openttd
04:13:04  <cr1t1cal> does anyone want to play a game of openttd?
04:16:19  *** KouDy has quit IRC
04:23:18  *** snail_UES_ has quit IRC
04:26:50  *** cr1t1cal has quit IRC
05:03:55  *** Pikka has joined #openttd
06:23:31  *** sla_ro|master has joined #openttd
06:37:09  *** KouDy has joined #openttd
06:44:06  *** debdog has quit IRC
06:48:12  *** debdog has joined #openttd
07:13:40  *** Progman has joined #openttd
07:14:39  *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
07:15:54  <andythenorth> o/
07:19:26  *** nielsm has joined #openttd
07:19:47  <andythenorth> Pikka sup?
07:29:41  *** sim-al2 has quit IRC
07:31:21  *** Alberth has joined #openttd
07:31:21  *** ChanServ sets mode: +o Alberth
07:37:46  *** tokai has joined #openttd
07:37:46  *** ChanServ sets mode: +v tokai
07:44:37  *** tokai|noir has quit IRC
07:52:07  *** Supercheese has quit IRC
07:52:23  *** Supercheese has joined #openttd
08:15:24  *** Supercheese has quit IRC
08:16:29  <Pikka> 'lo
08:16:33  *** goodger has quit IRC
08:16:51  <Pikka> not much sup... heading out in a minute
08:17:50  *** Pikka has quit IRC
08:28:55  <Eddi|zuHause> something feels wrong about the 32 types debate...
08:29:15  <TrueBrain> why?
08:30:53  <Eddi|zuHause> ok, the reason why they request more than 16 is that you run out with combinatoric explosion, but that means with 32 you get pretty much the same problem pretty much immediately, as it is just one single step in the combinatoric explosion
08:31:05  <Eddi|zuHause> and the whole UI part was basically ignored
08:31:31  <Eddi|zuHause> "look i got this 4k screen, why should i care?"
08:32:43  <TrueBrain> I like how map-array-redesign pops up again
08:32:45  <Eddi|zuHause> like, if we continue the 640k analogy, then extending to 32 is basically just himem.sys
08:32:47  <TrueBrain> I have been hearing that for 15 years now :P
08:32:56  <Eddi|zuHause> instead of EMM386
08:33:20  <TrueBrain> OpenTTD always has had talks about its limits .. that will never stop I guess
08:33:40  <TrueBrain> I remember we bumped the vehicle limit to 5k .. like .. that for sure should be enough, not?!
08:33:42  <TrueBrain> well .. not :P
08:33:51  <TrueBrain> or 4kx4k maps ...
08:35:07  <TrueBrain> but as it goes with any of these talks .. you just need someone to say: this is what we are going to do, deal with it
08:35:14  <TrueBrain> as it is better to pick something, than to pick nothing :)
08:35:22  <LordAro> new map array pops up because anything to do with extending it right now continues to be a hack :p
08:35:45  <Eddi|zuHause> there is not going to be a "new map array", ever...
08:35:58  <TrueBrain> ^^
08:36:20  <TrueBrain> besides the whole practical point, there is basically not a faster way to do this
08:36:27  <LordAro> probably
08:36:58  <Eddi|zuHause> and it's completely not relevant to the discussion. any extension (32,256,65k) you could imagine would be possible with the existing map array
08:37:27  <Eddi|zuHause> it just has to be made bigger
08:37:49  <TrueBrain> what is funny to me .. I keep reading rants on the forums about devs not adding anything, the default blablabla
08:37:58  <TrueBrain> but I also keep on reading: what you are about to add, is not sufficient, blablabla
08:38:08  <TrueBrain> so ... how about we do something, instead of talking about nothing? :D
08:39:22  <Eddi|zuHause> ok, but before doing "something", i am of the opinion that we should reach some sort of consensus what that "something" should be
08:39:36  <TrueBrain> I thought they did :)
08:39:38  <Eddi|zuHause> and i don't see that we reached that consensus yet
08:40:10  <TrueBrain> how many types are in NRT now?
08:40:27  <Eddi|zuHause> yesterday it was 15+15
08:40:28  <Rubidium> none?
08:40:41  <Eddi|zuHause> (road+tram)
08:40:42  <TrueBrain> so isnt that a good starting point? Increasing values is always possible
08:40:44  <TrueBrain> nothing is set in stone
08:40:46  <TrueBrain> etc
08:40:51  <TrueBrain> so why not first go with 15+15 .. and see what happens?
08:41:07  <TrueBrain> (I might be completely missing the point, but I dont see how talking about extending is useful without having something first)
08:42:42  <Eddi|zuHause> like, one part of the problem is "patchpack <XYZ> contains a patch for 32 types, so i design my set for that. it will not be compatible with trunk."... which i think is a stupid path to follow
08:43:12  <TrueBrain> and so the endless: we have to please everyone, issue comes around
08:44:16  <andythenorth> it's what rubidium said: none
08:44:43  <andythenorth> I am only doing forum blah blah chat because I can do piss all about moving NRT any further :)
08:44:44  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: it cannot be 2 answers
08:45:28  <andythenorth> I am out for most of day, but I am hoping I can help Wolf remove the remaining TODO lines
08:45:33  <andythenorth> later
08:45:34  <TrueBrain> w00p
08:45:39  <andythenorth> then maybe we can have 15 + 15
08:45:44  <andythenorth> which is better than none
08:45:48  <TrueBrain> isnt it already in NRT?
08:46:02  <andythenorth> yes, but NRT is effectively dead, unless someone moves it
08:46:14  <andythenorth> like it's had every possible long testing period
08:46:15  <Alberth> moin, hopefully with a not entirely unstable connection
08:46:34  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: so no offense, but you just added noise to the conversation :)
08:46:40  <TrueBrain> its not none .. it is 15+15
08:46:42  <TrueBrain> which is fine :)
08:46:42  *** Fuco has joined #openttd
08:46:43  <andythenorth> the ones who started NRT just need to remove remaining 1% of issues
08:46:54  <andythenorth> we're just FAIL :P
08:47:15  <andythenorth> TrueBrain: you're right, but eh, I'm embarassed about NRT
08:47:29  <TrueBrain> Eddi|zuHause: I did my fair share of Product Owner stuff leading people bla ... I am of the opinion you need to have a bit of BOFH attitude .. at a certain point someone just has to say: this is what we are going to do .. join us or leave us
08:47:38  <TrueBrain> as having endless debates about stuff just demotivates
08:47:39  <andythenorth> it could have been done weeks ago, I just don't want to face the work
08:47:49  <TrueBrain> andythenorth: don't be :) Were you around for TGP?
08:47:54  <andythenorth> no
08:48:01  <TrueBrain> TGP was "done", by a group of people not devs
08:48:10  <TrueBrain> they were like: this is ready to merge in trunk, tested, everything
08:48:25  <TrueBrain> so me and .. some other dev (sorry, cant remember) took it on to merge it into trunk
08:48:25  <andythenorth> mostly I make newgrfs on my own, because then it's 100% on me
08:48:31  <TrueBrain> it took 3 months :P
08:48:33  <andythenorth> :P
08:48:33  <Eddi|zuHause> ah, the "well tested" meme :p
08:48:46  <TrueBrain> but that is okay ... it got in there
08:48:52  <TrueBrain> sometimes things sit idle for a bit
08:48:57  <TrueBrain> as long as they sit idle for the right reasons
08:49:08  <TrueBrain> having debates about things that can be changed later ... is not a good reason :D
08:49:12  <Eddi|zuHause> cargodist existed for like 5 years before it finally got merged
08:49:22  <TrueBrain> another nice example :)
08:49:32  <TrueBrain> OpenTTD often lacks a bit of balls
08:49:43  <TrueBrain> I ahve seen it with BaNaNaS .. some authors REFUSED to add their grfs to it
08:49:44  <TrueBrain> some still do
08:49:46  <TrueBrain> fuck them
08:49:57  <TrueBrain> just no way you can get them all on board
08:50:07  <TrueBrain> ask for opinions, weight them, dismiss a few
08:50:08  <TrueBrain> fact of life
08:50:24  <andythenorth> what's in NRT 2?
08:50:48  <andythenorth> I use a lot of "we can look at that in a future version, let's ship something"
08:50:57  <andythenorth> then the people who like to talk talk about v2
08:51:03  <andythenorth> and the people who are bored by talk ship v1
08:51:21  <TrueBrain> the forum not really being flexible is not helping :)
08:51:25  <TrueBrain> 1 thread for everything is just annoying
08:51:33  <andythenorth> hmm
08:51:38  <andythenorth> doesn't really bother me :)
08:51:54  <andythenorth> it's obviously terrible for suggestion/feature chat
08:51:55  <TrueBrain> currently all I can see is that NRT is talking bla about how many toys they are going to get
08:52:05  <TrueBrain> totally missing the other good stuff in that thread :)
08:52:05  <andythenorth> that's just noise
08:52:09  <TrueBrain> exactly :)
08:52:14  <andythenorth> the interesting stuff is the other threads with people making test grfs
08:52:18  <andythenorth> that's real
08:52:19  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: the problem i see with that approach is that you're dividing the already low manpower for shipping something into two projects, which will even further delay shipping
08:52:37  <andythenorth> Eddi|zuHause: no, it segments off those who were delaying it with noise
08:52:45  <andythenorth> they had a negative net contribution
08:52:53  <andythenorth> theoretically
08:52:53  <TrueBrain> as with any project, also in real life, you need a captain who has enough balls to call out commands ... right or wrong, not relevant .. :)
08:53:11  <TrueBrain> better to be wrong than to stand still
08:53:18  <peter1138> Was my suggestion last night about road types feasible? Or just stupid...
08:53:19  <andythenorth> so it comes to: I can't remove the TODO because I don't know why they are there, but wolf seems to know
08:53:36  <andythenorth> so help Wolf remove TODO, ship big diff, profit
08:53:39  <TrueBrain> sounds like a good focus andythenorth :) Slap Wolftill they are gone :P
08:53:57  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: then split off the whole 32types discussion into a "Suggestions" thread, keep the "Development" thread about things to do for merging the existing implementation
08:54:18  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: call it a "feature freeze"
08:54:28  <TrueBrain> now you are talking like a Product Owner :D
08:54:39  <TrueBrain> set your Minimal Viable Product, and GO GO GO
08:54:39  <andythenorth> oh you mean the thread is a rambling off-topic disaster Eddi|zuHause? :)
08:54:48  <andythenorth> I don't have forum rights, don't want them
08:55:09  <Eddi|zuHause> then grab yourself a moderator :p
08:55:38  <andythenorth> the rambling doesn't bother me at all :)
08:56:08  <TrueBrain> as long as you keep your current focus split off from the rambling :)
08:56:42  <andythenorth> remove TODO, ship diff, profit
08:56:49  <peter1138> Haha
08:56:51  <andythenorth> peter1138: which suggestion? o_O
08:57:00  <andythenorth> "8 bit index to a roadtype/tramtype combination table"
08:57:01  <peter1138> Merge conflict in media/extra_grf/openttdgui.png ;(
08:57:04  <peter1138> andythenorth, yeah
08:57:15  <andythenorth> seems like it's solving a non-problem
08:57:22  <andythenorth> that merge conflict is the icons
08:57:31  <andythenorth> thought you fixed that already? o_O
08:57:33  <peter1138> Yes, I know what it is.
08:57:47  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: i don't think that "solution" is either viable or possible
08:58:00  <peter1138> andythenorth, yes, but I fixed those icons in master since.
08:58:35  <andythenorth> want me to fix the png? I can't do it for ~8 hours, but happy to later
08:58:43  <peter1138> Eddi|zuHause, which? And why?
08:59:33  <Eddi|zuHause> peter1138: the "instead of 16 road and 16 tram types, have 256 (road+tram)-type combinations"
08:59:37  <peter1138> andythenorth, I can do it, just more work :-)
09:00:00  <peter1138> Eddi|zuHause, okay. It was my suggestion, so tell me :-)
09:00:10  <andythenorth> I had the idea of pooling *types
09:00:22  <andythenorth> player can install as many as they want, but only 16 can be on the map at once
09:00:31  <andythenorth> so they could cycle them as they upgrade
09:00:45  <Eddi|zuHause> that sounds soo horrible
09:00:50  <andythenorth> like inventory in a MUD game
09:00:53  <Eddi|zuHause> i wouldn't want to play that game
09:01:14  <andythenorth> "your satchel has space for 16 railtypes"
09:01:36  <Eddi|zuHause> "you can't convert to this road, until you remove every trace of that road from the map"?!?
09:02:21  <peter1138> I considered that for railtypes as well.
09:02:35  <peter1138> It's basically the same thing as the 8 bit index.
09:02:42  <peter1138> (But 8 bits gives you more room)
09:03:23  <peter1138> Okay, when merging binary files, how do you get the us and them versions?
09:03:28  <Eddi|zuHause> the main problem there is that you offload what would be a design decision from the newgrf author onto the player
09:04:26  <Eddi|zuHause> and the player doesn't know he will have to make that decision, and will run face first into a wall
09:04:58  <Eddi|zuHause> and the error message he will get will be cryptic enough to not be understood by a large portion of players
09:05:43  <peter1138> A while back, someone wanted a hidden railtype that couldn't be built directly, but was there for mixing compatibility up. Can't remember who or what the complete purpose was.
09:05:59  <andythenorth> it's to permit vehicles to transcend types
09:06:11  <andythenorth> there's a GH issue about it
09:06:16  <Eddi|zuHause> it's always the same one... have a dual-voltage vehicle without having a dual-voltage railtype
09:06:24  <Eddi|zuHause> or dual-gauge
09:06:26  <Eddi|zuHause> or whatever
09:06:44  <andythenorth> vehicle that can go on both ROAD and DIRT
09:06:46  <peter1138> Kk
09:07:16  <Eddi|zuHause> we've had versions of that discussion for like 10 years every now and then
09:07:47  <Eddi|zuHause> IMHO that is best solved by having two articulated parts, and each part getting a different railtype
09:08:07  <Eddi|zuHause> (currently the implementation of articulated parts does not allow that)
09:09:12  * peter1138 considers the obvious benefit to just going out on the bike.
09:09:25  <andythenorth> massive upsides
09:09:41  <andythenorth> I am going out to do outdoor things
09:10:07  <andythenorth> the map array is inextensible, right :P
09:10:08  <andythenorth> ?
09:10:44  <andythenorth> we have bits 0-A, and adding B is not practical?
09:10:45  <Eddi|zuHause> not the word i would use
09:11:33  <TrueBrain> LordAro: https://github.com/TrueBrain/OpenTTD-DorpsGek
09:11:39  <TrueBrain> a bit longer answer to your question yesterday
09:13:09  <andythenorth> oh 0-A are tile classes?
09:13:36  <andythenorth> and then each class has 9 attributes
09:13:53  <peter1138> Eddi|zuHause, so anyway, you covered the not viable part, due to gameplay reasons. What about not possible?
09:15:00  <andythenorth> so each tile uses 80 bits for landscape?  is 80 historical, or is there some constraint / optimisation?
09:15:15  <andythenorth> I'm not proposing changing anything, just learning :P
09:15:20  <peter1138> We already increased it back in the day.
09:15:52  <Eddi|zuHause> well, how is that combination table made up? you count the number of types collectively defined in all newgrfs? then calculate A*B, and when that number is >256 then what? how about adding newgrfs mid-game, you have to recalculate all the indices?
09:16:15  <peter1138> Eddi|zuHause, it's built as the combinations are used.
09:17:34  <peter1138> So to start with, it has no entries, then a town builds a road and it has one entry.
09:18:04  <peter1138> Hence it solves one limit but adds another.
09:18:41  <Eddi|zuHause> so, it solves a hard limit, but adds a completely incomprehensible soft limit
09:18:58  <peter1138> Well it's still a hard limit but less obvious, yes :-)
09:19:12  <andythenorth> limits are good :)
09:19:14  <andythenorth> also BBL
09:19:17  *** andythenorth has quit IRC
09:20:37  <peter1138> But it also allows for having, say 25 road types and 5 tram types, which wouldn't push past the limit.
09:20:55  <peter1138> 25/10 would be possible too
09:22:21  <peter1138> 48/5 even ;p
09:22:55  <peter1138> So you could engineer it so that the combination limit is < 256, then you'd have no weird gameplay limit.
09:23:25  <peter1138> I mean, obviously every author will want 32 road types and 32 tram types, but meh.
09:24:24  <peter1138> You could then have the hidden types not take up a slot.
09:33:16  *** synchris has joined #openttd
09:39:44  <peter1138> So yeah, if you put that limit in... is that worth doing? Hmm.
09:46:33  *** Wacko1976 has joined #openttd
09:48:15  *** gelignite has joined #openttd
09:51:42  *** Wolf01 has joined #openttd
09:52:24  <Wolf01> Moin
10:05:36  <Alberth> moin
10:09:06  *** Wormnest has joined #openttd
10:09:10  *** Markk has joined #openttd
10:36:07  *** HerzogDeXtEr has joined #openttd
10:58:11  *** Thedarkb-X40 has joined #openttd
11:17:32  *** kais58 has quit IRC
11:43:33  *** Progman has quit IRC
11:51:42  *** Thedarkb-X40 has quit IRC
12:11:43  *** sim-al2 has joined #openttd
12:57:55  *** Thedarkb-X40 has joined #openttd
13:02:30  *** goodger has joined #openttd
13:32:48  *** Thedarkb-X40 has quit IRC
13:34:19  *** supermop has joined #openttd
13:34:20  *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
13:34:44  <andythenorth> SignalTypes
13:36:13  <Alberth> nah
13:36:19  <supermop> type types
13:38:52  *** Thedarkb-X40 has joined #openttd
13:41:15  <andythenorth> or just add 32 bits to each tile :P
13:41:18  <andythenorth> for stuff
13:42:09  <LordAro> how much does each tile have currently?
13:42:56  <andythenorth> looks like 80 bits by my count
13:43:03  <andythenorth> docs/landscape_grid.html
13:43:26  <andythenorth> 2 x 16 bits for * types
13:43:36  <andythenorth> then can also do 2 railtypes per tile
13:43:45  <andythenorth> or some bollocks with 'electrification types'
13:44:06  * andythenorth biab
13:47:01  <Wolf01> ButGroundTypes might solve everything
13:47:17  <Wolf01> Even for railtypes
13:59:56  <LordAro> TrueBrain: are you thinking of making github-dorpsgek some sort of supybot plugin?
14:13:43  *** Thedarkb-X40 has quit IRC
14:19:48  *** sim-al2 has quit IRC
14:36:50  *** Progman has joined #openttd
14:47:28  <TrueBrain> LordAro: supybot is kinda dead
14:47:38  <TrueBrain> but I was more thinking what-ever-IRC-bot, is part of that repo
14:47:50  <TrueBrain> (most likely via a 'pip install' in a Dockerfile orsomething)
14:48:13  <TrueBrain> but it has to be an IRC bot and a HTTP server-ish
14:48:58  <LordAro> mm
14:49:14  <LordAro> i'm not sure i know of any existing bots that have that sort of framework
15:17:47  <LordAro> TrueBrain: you'll be pleased to know i'm currently 14 comments into a midi driver PR review
15:22:49  <peter1138> Afternoon
15:28:05  <LordAro> oho
15:28:08  <LordAro> i have gcc8
15:28:11  <LordAro> there are new warnings
15:29:36  *** Thedarkb-X40 has joined #openttd
15:33:01  *** KouDy has quit IRC
15:37:11  <LordAro> https://paste.openttdcoop.org/puwxwq4az seems to be just two - invalid usage of lengthof, and doing things with the memory of (nontrivial) classes
15:37:18  <LordAro> two classes of warnings*
15:37:44  *** snail_UES_ has joined #openttd
15:45:55  *** KouDy has joined #openttd
15:57:28  <nielsm> LordAro, the "glitch" thing in my music code is meant as an easter egg, it emulates a bug I had while working on it (but without crashing and walking all over memory)
15:57:48  <peter1138> Is that... useful? o_O
15:58:00  <LordAro> ha
15:58:08  <LordAro> feels like a bit too much code for an easter egg
16:03:38  <nielsm> well the majority of the code is for the UI, otherwise it's just three lines :P
16:03:41  *** KouDy has quit IRC
16:11:42  *** KouDy has joined #openttd
16:12:06  *** Wormnest_ has joined #openttd
16:13:46  *** Flygon has quit IRC
16:15:46  *** supermop has quit IRC
16:16:53  <andythenorth> hmm
16:16:55  <andythenorth> what if
16:17:01  <andythenorth> but no
16:18:43  *** Wormnest has quit IRC
16:22:20  <andythenorth> Wolf01: if we knock out one TODO at a time...
16:22:23  <andythenorth> we can get it done
16:22:29  <andythenorth> we should maybe fork Peter's fork :P
16:24:15  <LordAro> but that would be using git as it was intended!
16:24:19  <LordAro> preposterous
16:24:29  <Wolf01> There are only 4 todos to work on, 3 are on town_cmd and the town_roads branch should address those, one is a "I don't know how to perform a valide check here", all the others are nonsense
16:24:30  <andythenorth> we could file patches on tickets
16:24:46  <andythenorth> some just need deleted?
16:24:53  <andythenorth> "it could be done by christmas!"
16:41:07  *** Wacko1976_ has joined #openttd
16:47:03  *** Wacko1976 has quit IRC
16:54:48  *** supermop has joined #openttd
17:02:53  *** supermop has quit IRC
17:04:13  *** snail_UES_ has quit IRC
17:29:15  *** glx has joined #openttd
17:29:15  *** ChanServ sets mode: +v glx
17:56:45  *** Supercheese has joined #openttd
18:07:16  *** frosch123 has joined #openttd
18:08:23  *** supermop has joined #openttd
18:16:26  *** supermop has quit IRC
18:45:22  <andythenorth> if (rt == ROADTYPE_ROAD) rst |= ROADSUBTYPES_NORMAL; // Road is always available. // TODO
18:45:27  * andythenorth looking for TODOs
19:00:17  *** iSoSyS has joined #openttd
19:16:58  *** kais58 has joined #openttd
19:25:51  *** synchris has quit IRC
19:29:51  *** gnu_jj_ has quit IRC
19:33:38  *** gnu_jj has joined #openttd
19:39:21  <peter1138> I haven't finished rebasing yet.
19:41:37  <andythenorth> I've got your fork checked out
19:43:19  <peter1138> kk
19:43:46  <peter1138> Will just need a rebase later, not difficult
19:47:35  <andythenorth> I haven't changed anything :P
19:47:41  <andythenorth> I don't know what these TODOs mean
19:47:48  <peter1138> :p
19:47:57  <andythenorth> hoping Wolf01 turns up and we fix them one at a time :)
19:49:15  <Wolf01> I'll look at it in the next days
19:51:14  *** supermop has joined #openttd
19:57:47  <supermop> yo
20:04:23  <andythenorth> hi mop
20:05:01  * peter1138 ponders ... playing ... this game ...
20:05:20  <peter1138> Or should I stick on the VR headset and do a bit of space flying. Hmm.
20:10:16  <andythenorth> [dunno emoji]
20:14:10  * andythenorth plays the game
20:14:33  <andythenorth> FIRS needs a decent economy though
20:14:36  <andythenorth> it all sucks currently
20:17:25  *** nielsm has quit IRC
20:20:49  <V453000> omg not this agaon
20:20:51  <V453000> again
20:20:51  <V453000> .
20:20:52  <V453000> :P
20:21:19  <peter1138> What again?
20:23:25  <V453000> andy reworking firs
20:23:38  <andythenorth> why does Busy Bee keep crashing then? :|
20:24:04  <andythenorth> Alberth: "Your script made an error: wrong number of parameters" o_O
20:25:29  *** snail_UES_ has joined #openttd
20:28:21  <andythenorth> V453000: FIRS has no concept :P
20:28:24  <andythenorth> it's lame
20:28:51  <V453000> it's fine
20:29:00  <V453000> I think it's pretty great as is
20:31:05  *** KouDy has quit IRC
20:31:59  <andythenorth> k I ignore
20:32:04  <andythenorth> much trains to draw
20:32:55  <V453000> :D
20:33:35  <V453000> honestly, I would consider FIRS finished and instead of breaking it I would either just add economies which don't wreck existing stuff, or even make a new industry set ... with a concept if you say so :P
20:34:31  <snail_UES_> I was reading about the 32 railtypes debate…
20:34:46  <V453000> who needs 32 railtypes :0
20:34:50  <snail_UES_> since the patch already exists, and some patchpacks already use that, why not adding it to trunk as well?
20:35:15  <snail_UES_> otherwise, it sounds like dictating newGRF authors what they “should” and “should not” do...
20:36:08  <LordAro> no one's making them make a grf that only works with a patchpack
20:37:04  <V453000> I don't know the technical obstacles, but why is 16 not enough? :d
20:37:16  <LordAro> also ^
20:37:31  <snail_UES_> because historically there were many different kinds of electrification
20:37:56  <snail_UES_> normal catenary, threephase, third rail
20:38:14  *** KouDy has joined #openttd
20:38:41  <snail_UES_> even when we exclude different voltages, we still have multiple types… and, if a set wants to cover the period 1840 - today, it needs a decent number of track types (around 6 to 8 if it covers different gauges)
20:38:48  <V453000> and non-historically in my mind is a wetrail, slugrail and a turtlerail...
20:38:50  *** HerzogDeXtEr has quit IRC
20:39:16  <snail_UES_> the thing is, some people would find this feature useful
20:39:19  <LordAro> i think going for that sort of historical accuracy in OTTD is silly
20:39:30  <snail_UES_> why not helping them, instead of trying to convince them they’re "wrong"...?
20:39:54  <Alberth> andythenorth: don't know, I think it's a problem in openttd, but haven't checked where it comes from
20:40:22  <andythenorth> seems reproducible
20:40:33  <andythenorth> I've seen it on two different OS versions
20:40:46  <V453000> if it's not a technical obstacle, I agree with you snail_UES_ ,even if I do consider this kind of realism just perverse
20:41:16  <snail_UES_> V453000: fine, many people think differently :)
20:41:37  * andythenorth sets realistic train colours in game
20:41:41  <Alberth> yeah, but squirrel code hasn't changed, and we claim compatibility with some version which thus should stay compatible too
20:41:48  <andythenorth> if only there was a livery UI
20:42:08  <peter1138> Silly UI.
20:42:13  <andythenorth> Alberth: have you seen the error?
20:42:21  <peter1138> The 32 railtype patch is uglyh.
20:42:21  <peter1138> -h
20:42:53  <peter1138> Borrowing a bit from a different place in the map array.
20:42:59  <Alberth> yep, a game of mine crashed on load, while I loaded it before without problem' should try if I can get older versions of that save to crash too
20:43:58  <snail_UES_> peter1138: why ugly?
20:44:14  <LordAro> snail_UES_: a common issue with the stuff in the patchpacks is they're often done in a hacky and unmaintainable way - the core game *must* be stable, load old save games and generally not be awful code
20:44:49  <peter1138> 21:42 < peter1138> Borrowing a bit from a different place in the map array.
20:44:56  <LordAro> ^ case in point
20:45:42  *** sim-al2 has joined #openttd
20:45:50  <Alberth> it's like extending a graphics by adding a piece at a different place in the image
20:47:26  <andythenorth> this stuff can also make any future features harder
20:47:46  <andythenorth> FWIW, 16 cargos would not be enough, but 32 is :P
20:48:00  <andythenorth> not sure that is a useful comment though
20:48:08  <peter1138> Wasn't the original limit 12 or something? :p
20:48:51  <LordAro> andythenorth: you mentioned adding another 32bits earlier - if the current total is 80bits, i'd think it better to add another 48bits to round out to 128. cache lines will probably be nicer about stuff that way
20:49:13  <andythenorth> what would we do with so many bits? o_O
20:49:13  <LordAro> (not that it particularly matters anyway)
20:49:25  <peter1138> 65k railtyupes
20:49:57  <LordAro> @calc 2**(4+48)
20:49:57  <DorpsGek> LordAro: 4503599627370496
20:49:58  <snail_UES_> well, the number of needed railtypes would be limited by what exists in the real world
20:49:59  <frosch123> i would approve 64k railtypes :)
20:50:03  <LordAro> that many railtypes
20:50:08  <frosch123> but only for visual difference
20:50:16  <frosch123> compatibility is boring
20:50:32  <andythenorth> 1 type for each tile on the map
20:50:44  <andythenorth> hmm
20:50:55  * andythenorth ponders electrification type limited by map tile
20:50:56  <LordAro> OpenTTD. Is. Not. A. Simulation.
20:51:05  <andythenorth> so 25% of map is 1500V DC
20:51:08  <andythenorth> 25% is 3rd rail
20:51:17  <andythenorth> and there are transition zones :P
20:51:27  <Eddi|zuHause> <LordAro> andythenorth: you mentioned adding another 32bits earlier - if the current total is 80bits, i'd think it better to add another 48bits to round out to 128. cache lines will probably be nicer about stuff that way <-- that's why the map array is actually split into two, one 64-bit and one 16-bit (used to be 8-bit) array entries
20:51:35  <peter1138> Also, splitting off electrification from railtype is a silly idea.
20:51:44  <andythenorth> isn't it :)
20:51:48  <snail_UES_> peter1138: why is that?
20:52:09  <peter1138> Because it reduces the number you can have
20:52:15  <Eddi|zuHause> snail_UES_: the short answer is: "we've been over that already, and it was impractical"
20:52:20  *** Alberth has left #openttd
20:52:49  <snail_UES_> I think Locomotion did that...?
20:53:08  <snail_UES_> you would build the rail, and then you could overlay catenary and/or third rail on top of that
20:53:11  <andythenorth> http://letstourengland.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Banksey-02.jpg
20:53:17  <LordAro> Locomotion is a completely different game, underneath
20:53:24  <LordAro> it's basically RCT
20:53:58  <andythenorth> "playing it safe can cause a lot of damage in the long run"
20:54:33  *** frosch123 has quit IRC
20:55:47  <snail_UES_> ok… but I’m still not sure why it would reduce the number you can have
20:55:59  <snail_UES_> you’d have 8 railtypes and 3 electrification types
20:56:31  <snail_UES_> and you would mix them as you wanted… each vehicle would check if it’s compatible and powered on those present in a tile
20:56:51  <andythenorth> 2 electrification types if my maths is right
20:57:00  <andythenorth> one of which is 'not electrified'
20:57:24  <LordAro> that 5th bit can't (easily) happen, remember
20:57:40  <snail_UES_> ok, so 4… not electrified, catenary, third rail, threephase
20:57:57  <peter1138> Why those 4?
20:57:58  <andythenorth> and 4 railtypes
20:58:00  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: but playing it unsafe will almost definitely cause a lot of damage
20:58:14  <snail_UES_> it was just an example
20:58:25  <andythenorth> Eddi|zuHause: Banksy doesn't have to write a spec, just graffiti :)
20:58:33  <snail_UES_> the idea is to offer flexibility to newgrf authors
20:58:44  <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: maybe he should use a modern language?
20:59:23  <peter1138> What about 5th rail?
20:59:42  <andythenorth> don't wee on it
20:59:48  <peter1138> What about AC vs DC?
20:59:54  <snail_UES_> peter1138: these are all questions a newGRF author would take care of
20:59:56  <andythenorth> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bme0JpXQUg
20:59:56  <peter1138> What about low voltage vs high voltage?
21:00:06  <peter1138> Where would it fit?
21:00:15  <peter1138> Is that an electrification system, or a railtype?
21:00:17  <snail_UES_> I feel OTTD could be a base and offer flexibility to those authors
21:00:37  <Eddi|zuHause> we have that flexibility, it's called a railtype label
21:01:00  <peter1138> What about when I add narrow gauge, does it need to support all 4 of these electrification types?
21:01:12  <Eddi|zuHause> or maglev
21:01:18  <andythenorth> could we check 'powered' by pathfinding from current tile to nearest 2 'substations'
21:01:20  <andythenorth> ??
21:01:24  * andythenorth has sillly ideas
21:01:28  <snail_UES_> peter1138: thanks! you’re proving my point :)
21:01:38  <andythenorth> electrify like signals, e.g. similar to PBS reservations
21:01:40  <peter1138> Does it need to support all 4 of those types?
21:01:46  <andythenorth> build a feed-in tile
21:02:08  <snail_UES_> if railtypes and electrification types are baked together, if I had a different gauge, I need to define as many railtype labels as electrification systems it supports
21:02:11  <V453000> 2nd map level with underground electric wiring logistics
21:02:19  <andythenorth> V453000: profit
21:02:28  <Eddi|zuHause> underground pipes!
21:02:29  <andythenorth> each tile has 'power' level on it
21:02:34  <snail_UES_> if they’re separate, on the other hand, I just define NG… and then I could build electrification on top of that
21:02:41  <andythenorth> hax for MOAR
21:02:48  <peter1138> Who provides the graphics for the electrification of narrow gauge in that case?
21:02:59  <snail_UES_> the newGRF...
21:03:04  <andythenorth> electricity grf!
21:03:17  <snail_UES_> a newGRF author should provide graphics for its combinations
21:03:29  <V453000> well the base set has catenary?
21:03:45  <peter1138> And back to maglev, what electrification systems are supported there?
21:03:48  <peter1138> (Or monorail)
21:03:53  <peter1138> 3rd-rail maglev?
21:03:59  <andythenorth> definitely
21:04:02  <Eddi|zuHause> 3rd rail monorail :p
21:04:13  <V453000> don't forget WETRail :>
21:04:45  <peter1138> 4 types of electrification may not fit what a railtype can do
21:05:10  <andythenorth> the nice thing is that patchpacks will be easier soon
21:05:22  <peter1138> To separate railtype from electrification simply wastes space.
21:05:42  <peter1138> To have 4 electrification types would use up 2 bits.
21:05:42  <snail_UES_> I think each newGRF would define rail and electrification types, then be able to combine them… without combining pieces from different GRFs
21:05:50  <peter1138> That would leave 2 bits remaining for the railtype.
21:05:55  <peter1138> So you could then only have 4 railtypes.
21:06:11  <Eddi|zuHause> snail_UES_: the main problem with separating tracks from electrification is exactly this problem of "are all combinations valid?", because if not, then you need the same storage space (which is the limiting factor currently) but you actually reduce the number of total railtypes available in the game
21:06:53  <peter1138> Right, it every rail type supported every combination of electrification, then you'd end up exactly where you are at the moment.
21:07:07  <peter1138> If some railtypes don't support some combination, you are in a WORSE situation.
21:07:28  <peter1138> Because you have wasted some combination of bits that can't be used now.
21:07:30  <snail_UES_> so the issue is to find the 5th bit?
21:07:56  <snail_UES_> and you solved it using a workaround?
21:08:17  <Eddi|zuHause> yes. basically piecing together 5 bits from leftover cutouts
21:08:32  <Eddi|zuHause> which is... terrible quality
21:08:44  <Eddi|zuHause> even if on the surface it works
21:08:45  <snail_UES_> if the issue is technical, then I can understand...
21:08:54  <peter1138> There is simply no instance where splitting railtype and electrification type is actually a benefit.
21:09:14  <snail_UES_> what I don’t always agree with, is when someone tries to convince others they “don’t need” more railtypes :p
21:09:18  <peter1138> Of course it is technical.
21:10:20  <peter1138> For instance, borrowing a bit from elsewhere requires 2 reads of the map array every time.
21:10:38  <peter1138> (And 2 writes, which also needs 2 reads itself.)
21:11:03  <Eddi|zuHause> snail_UES_: yeah, no, the "you don't need that" argument is nonsense. but the actual argument is "even if we did that, next week another person would come along and demand a 6th bit, so we wouldn't actually solve anything"
21:12:04  <peter1138> Don't start of 64 types ;)
21:12:12  <peter1138> That requires way more changes than 32 types.
21:12:16  <Eddi|zuHause> snail_UES_: so we're carefully finetuning the levels of "impossible" that we're actually willing to tackle
21:12:32  <snail_UES_> then I think I’ll design my newGRF with 21 railtypes, adding a parameter that undefines 5 of them to work with trunk :p
21:12:54  <snail_UES_> maybe I’ll keep 16 as the default value of this parameter
21:13:08  <peter1138> Now, the drop down list certainly will suck with such a large number.
21:13:50  <snail_UES_> peter1138: speaking of the dropdown list, any chance we could have some railtypes excluded from there?
21:14:08  <snail_UES_> say a set has AC and DC voltages, and some engines are bi-current (can run on both)
21:14:22  <snail_UES_> this set will have to define a railtype compatible with both for these engines
21:14:36  <peter1138> So it is conceivable that the UI could be changed to provide a "base" railtype, and have electrification types "extend" that base railtype. But it would and should still be separate labels.
21:14:37  <snail_UES_> but this railtype shouldn’t actually be buildable...
21:14:57  <snail_UES_> peter1138: I like your idea
21:14:58  <peter1138> Probably possible.
21:14:58  <V453000> doen't xUSSR or dutch trains already do some stuff like that?
21:15:22  <V453000> I mean that AC DC whatever nonsense
21:15:31  <Eddi|zuHause> snail_UES_: i think that issue has come up in the past (e.g. in the unified railtype scheme discussion), and the two arguments i have there are: 1) is it really necessary to hide that combined type? there are real-world applications where voltage can be switched in some stations
21:15:59  <andythenorth> it's another variant of the mixed gauge thing
21:16:01  <Eddi|zuHause> 2) i'd rather like it if the dual-voltage could be done as articulated vehicles, where each part gets a different railtype
21:16:11  <andythenorth> or the '4x4 trucks on dirt roads and highways' thing
21:16:34  <Eddi|zuHause> with 2) you wouldn't need to reserve a railtype slot
21:16:47  <peter1138> http://www.railway-technical.com/_Media/ole-at-old-dalby-labels-prc_med.png
21:16:49  <peter1138> ^ it's buildable ;)
21:17:27  <snail_UES_> Eddi|zuHause: so the first half is DC, the second is AC, both are “compatible” with DC and AC railtypes, and either one would be powered on any of these two...?
21:17:38  <peter1138> (That would not be possible if "electrification type" was stored separately, btw)
21:17:41  <Eddi|zuHause> snail_UES_: yes, basically
21:18:03  <Eddi|zuHause> snail_UES_: i've never actually looked into what would be necessary to allow that, though
21:18:17  <Eddi|zuHause> snail_UES_: the current specs say "you mustn't do that"
21:18:21  <peter1138> As a bonus, it automatically provides the correct power/TE output. If it was supported which it is not.
21:18:59  <peter1138> That image is actually another reason why splitting electrification type off is not a good idea.
21:19:20  <peter1138> You'd need 1 bit on the map array for each type, else you couldn't combine them.
21:19:31  <snail_UES_> peter1138: only if a rail tyle could have one and only one electrification type
21:19:54  <peter1138> snail_UES_, yes. You need *loads* of bits if it's to be a combination.
21:19:59  <Eddi|zuHause> snail_UES_: well, it currently can have only one railtype.
21:20:18  <peter1138> 4 electrification types would need 3 bits (you don't need a bit for none in that case)
21:20:22  <V453000> would that mean you can't build two differently powered tracks on the same diagonal  tile?
21:20:25  <peter1138> Which would leave you with 1 bit for railtype. lol.
21:20:34  <Eddi|zuHause> V453000: nope
21:20:35  <V453000> now you can at least get an universal railtype to solve that issue
21:20:41  <snail_UES_> ok… I was hoping you could overlay, say, “catenary” AND “third rail” on a rail tile
21:20:49  <andythenorth> no
21:20:58  <snail_UES_> if it’s such a hassle then I understand
21:21:10  <andythenorth> not unless you have CA3R or something as the type
21:21:10  <peter1138> So yeah, this is why railtypes and electrification types are not separate. There's no logical way it makes sense.
21:21:16  <andythenorth> and then you bodge the sprites
21:21:21  <peter1138> By all means it could be "faked" in the UI.
21:22:33  *** Supercheese has quit IRC
21:22:50  *** Supercheese has joined #openttd
21:23:18  <peter1138> So who'll be brave and add another 8 bits ;)
21:23:56  <snail_UES_> :p
21:24:09  <snail_UES_> even just a 5th bit would be a great step forward ;)
21:24:18  <peter1138> Yeah it doesn't work like that.
21:24:55  <andythenorth> add 32 bits
21:25:06  <andythenorth> @calc 4096 * 4096 * 32
21:25:06  <DorpsGek> andythenorth: 536870912
21:25:20  <andythenorth> @calc 536870912 / 1024
21:25:20  <DorpsGek> andythenorth: 524288
21:25:21  <V453000> much number
21:25:23  <Wolf01> 'night
21:25:27  <peter1138> /8 :p
21:25:28  <andythenorth> bye Wolf01
21:25:28  *** Wolf01 has quit IRC
21:25:39  <peter1138> @calc 4096 * 4096 * 8
21:25:39  <DorpsGek> peter1138: 134217728
21:25:47  <peter1138> 134MB, not too bad.
21:25:54  <peter1138> Erm
21:26:01  <peter1138> /8 ;(
21:26:04  <peter1138> @calc 4096 * 4096 * 32 / 8
21:26:05  <DorpsGek> peter1138: 67108864
21:26:08  <peter1138> 64MB.
21:26:37  <peter1138> Although 32 bits makes no sense.
21:26:40  * LordAro does a PR
21:26:44  <peter1138> It has to be 16 bits or 48 bits, as LordAro said.
21:26:58  <LordAro> well it doesn't *have* to
21:27:00  <andythenorth> yeah 48 :P
21:27:03  <peter1138> No but alignment.
21:27:05  <LordAro> but you'd be pretty insane not to :p
21:27:13  <andythenorth> 16 bits for type 1, 16 bits for type 2, 16 bits spare
21:27:25  <andythenorth> 16 bits for evil ideas I have
21:27:30  <peter1138> If you added 16 bits to the array...
21:27:59  <peter1138> Would 64 railtypes ever be enough :p
21:28:25  <andythenorth> you know it wouldn't
21:28:27  <peter1138> You'd need to move stuff around in the map array of course.
21:28:33  <andythenorth> it's not nearly enough
21:28:52  <peter1138> I guess m4 is used for level-crossings with NRT.
21:28:55  <andythenorth> because every grf will then contain 30 or 40 types
21:29:00  <peter1138> Actually I guess it's used anyway.
21:29:07  <andythenorth> so to combine grfs, the 64 limit will be hit trivially
21:29:30  <andythenorth> tragedy of the commons
21:29:31  <peter1138> In theory they should be using the same labels if it's the same type.
21:29:45  <snail_UES_> peter1138: 64 railtypes wouldn’t be enough, if newGRF authors started using them as visually different variants
21:29:54  <peter1138> ...
21:30:12  <peter1138> Rusty rails
21:30:16  <peter1138> Slightly less rusty rails
21:30:23  *** sla_ro|master has quit IRC
21:30:26  <peter1138> Clean rails with 48km/h limit
21:30:35  <peter1138> Dirty rails with 49.5km/h limit
21:30:54  <andythenorth> yes
21:31:02  <LordAro> rails with leaves with a 0km/h limit
21:31:03  *** gelignite has quit IRC
21:31:10  <andythenorth> thermite welded rails with concrete sleepers
21:31:12  <peter1138> Removed rails
21:31:31  <peter1138> Delapidated rails
21:31:31  <andythenorth> bullhead rail on wooden sleepers with chairs
21:31:39  <andythenorth> pandrol clipped rails
21:31:48  <andythenorth> rails on concrete cast bed with rubber pads
21:31:52  <supermop> rails with a bit of little trash every 100m
21:31:57  <snail_UES_> yes… but if it’s technically possible, I wouldn’t see why OTTD shouldn’t support more railtypes
21:32:05  <andythenorth> AWS ramp rail (1 tile only)
21:32:08  <supermop> rails with a bit of trash every 50 m
21:32:09  <snail_UES_> I can understand the argument that it’s technically difficult
21:32:12  <andythenorth> rail with pax crossing tile
21:32:19  <andythenorth> rail with catch point
21:32:30  <andythenorth> in a nice way, imagine what GarryG would do with it
21:32:37  * andythenorth loves GarryG's stuff
21:32:38  <peter1138> Well, adding more space to the array is not technically difficult. It's just not done without an exceptional reason.
21:32:48  <snail_UES_> but it’d be useless to dictate newGRF authors what hey “should” and “shouldn’t” do
21:32:50  <andythenorth> it's not worth it unless we go big :P
21:32:56  <peter1138> How would you use 64 railtypes up?
21:33:24  <snail_UES_> peter1138: as for me? I’d only need 21
21:33:33  <snail_UES_> I can’t see how I’d use more up...
21:33:34  <peter1138> That seems a lot less than 64.
21:33:37  <andythenorth> peter1138: easy, just make loads of eye candy
21:34:10  <snail_UES_> andythenorth: yes, I can see some people wanting them. Not my case
21:34:39  *** Progman has quit IRC
21:37:10  <andythenorth> snail_UES_: at least you come and make the case in discussion :)
21:37:20  <andythenorth> unlike people who just complain in forum
21:40:36  <snail_UES_> andythenorth: yeah… well you can’t please everyone all the time, but seeing something in a patchpack and not in trunk can be frustrating at times
21:41:07  <snail_UES_> the reason why something is not in trunk is not always clear to everyone
21:42:14  <peter1138> Most probably a patch pack has just increased the size of the map array.
21:43:47  <andythenorth> such sleeping I must
21:43:53  <andythenorth> bye
21:43:54  *** andythenorth has left #openttd
22:10:44  <peter1138> http://fuzzle.org/~petern/ottd/64lol.png
22:10:48  <peter1138> ^ Best game-play ever.
22:11:59  <LordAro> those graphics look weird
22:12:27  <peter1138> RAWR, I guess.
22:35:14  <snail_UES_> peter1138: 64 railtypes? how did you manage that? :p
22:50:14  *** iSoSyS has quit IRC
22:53:12  *** KouDy has quit IRC
23:00:13  *** Wormnest_ has quit IRC
23:10:36  <Eddi|zuHause> getting them in that list is not the difficult part :p
23:13:02  *** Wacko1976_ has quit IRC
23:41:29  *** KouDy has joined #openttd
23:44:43  *** Fuco has quit IRC

Powered by YARRSTE version: svn-trunk