Times are UTC Toggle Colours
00:03:32 *** DDR has joined #openttd 00:17:46 *** supermop has joined #openttd 00:24:22 *** Wolf01 has quit IRC 00:46:25 *** orudge` has quit IRC 00:47:04 *** orudge` has joined #openttd 00:47:04 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o orudge` 01:15:44 *** supermop has quit IRC 01:25:53 *** Flygon has joined #openttd 01:29:33 *** supermop has joined #openttd 01:34:50 *** ToBeFree has quit IRC 01:48:52 *** orudge` has quit IRC 01:49:05 *** orudge` has joined #openttd 01:49:05 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o orudge` 02:15:20 *** HerzogDeXtEr has quit IRC 02:32:31 *** orudge` has quit IRC 02:32:37 *** orudge` has joined #openttd 02:32:37 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o orudge` 02:35:45 *** glx has quit IRC 02:45:01 *** Biolunar_ has joined #openttd 02:52:01 *** Biolunar has quit IRC 03:24:56 *** Montana has joined #openttd 03:50:13 *** Montana has quit IRC 04:27:07 *** tux has joined #openttd 04:27:09 *** mindlesstux has quit IRC 04:27:40 *** tux is now known as Guest4393 05:10:55 *** _dp_ has quit IRC 05:39:15 *** Alberth has joined #openttd 05:39:15 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o Alberth 05:39:29 <Alberth> moin 05:59:28 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd 06:06:07 <andythenorth> o/ 06:06:31 <Alberth> o/ 06:21:27 <andythenorth> probably time for a BB game eh 06:25:58 *** adf88 has joined #openttd 06:48:33 *** adf88 has quit IRC 06:50:09 *** adf88 has joined #openttd 07:00:05 *** Guest4393 has quit IRC 07:01:03 *** mindlesstux has joined #openttd 07:03:03 *** D-HUND has joined #openttd 07:03:08 *** DDR has quit IRC 07:06:06 *** debdog has quit IRC 07:10:30 <Alberth> hmm, likely, but busy matching database records against each other in python 07:12:55 <Eddi|zuHause> sounds like you should do that in sql instead? 07:13:12 *** orudge` has quit IRC 07:13:34 *** orudge` has joined #openttd 07:13:34 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o orudge` 07:17:09 <andythenorth> something has to generate the sql, no? 07:17:10 <andythenorth> :P 07:17:46 <Eddi|zuHause> xslt! :p 07:18:09 <Eddi|zuHause> (i have actually no clue how that works) 07:19:39 <andythenorth> you’re not missing anything 07:24:02 <Alberth> xslt is just fun, you have 3 different languiages (input language, output language, and rewrite-control language), and all of them are in xml 07:24:48 <V453000> sup yo 07:25:09 <Alberth> I haven't found how to rewrite several steps in sequence, not sure it is actually supported 07:25:12 <Alberth> hi hi V 07:26:26 <Alberth> Eddi: yes, sql would be nice, if only all records were complete, did not have spelling mistakes, wrong data, etc etc 07:27:34 <Alberth> ie the kind of stuff you can expect when humans copy millions of records from centuries old books 07:27:56 <andythenorth> some new project? o_O 07:28:37 <Alberth> somewhat, just providing some code to construct matches between the records 07:28:51 <Alberth> I am not running the project :) 07:30:05 <Alberth> 9 level deep for loops :p 07:31:51 <Eddi|zuHause> Alberth: the few steps i made towards xslt once made it sound like it was a tree reorganization tool, which made it sound scary enough, and only works on xml, which made it useless enough, to not care any further 07:32:33 <Alberth> sounds fair :) 07:33:21 <Alberth> I did a few steps more, but once I found you could not concatenate rewrite steps, usefulness reduced to near-zero 07:34:06 <Alberth> ie cat input | xslt step1 | xslt strp2 | xslt step3 > output didn't feel sane :p 07:34:30 <Eddi|zuHause> yeah, that sounds like it would be useful 07:34:53 <Alberth> I still wonder if I just missed it, or if it's really not possible 07:35:07 <Alberth> it seems a very basic notion to have in a functional rewriting language 07:35:50 <andythenorth> in my limited experience of it, xslt is a solution looking for a problem 07:36:07 <Alberth> but as you said, being xml in everything, it gets too complicated too quickly to be of any real use 07:36:52 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: in my experience, that happens a lot in maths. where 100 years later someone comes and finds the problem 07:37:09 <Alberth> andy, it may one of these cases where the problem you're solving is simpler than the solution :p 07:37:26 <andythenorth> yes 07:37:52 <Eddi|zuHause> like, this "boolean algebra" thing, that was completely useless 07:37:52 <andythenorth> xslt for rewriting existing HTML -> new DOM 07:38:11 <Eddi|zuHause> ... until someone built a computer 07:38:15 <Alberth> Eddi: that works in math, since you're talking about fundamental properties. xslt is simply avoided by picking any other solution 07:39:18 <andythenorth> xsly is the purpotedly ‘simple’ solution for rewriting html on the fly, because it can be handled by a lightweight stateless WSGI app, simple pipeline 07:39:37 <andythenorth> but the simplicity of the architecture moves all the complexity into the actual transforms 07:39:41 <andythenorth> where it really sucks 07:40:09 <Eddi|zuHause> sounds like you need an xslt generator :p 07:40:21 <Alberth> it heavily depends on how much rewriting you want, I am sure there are valid cases for it 07:40:57 <Alberth> eg simple tag rewriting, or inserting your content somewhere 07:41:02 <Eddi|zuHause> but now, enough mocking of a language i barely understand 07:41:11 <Eddi|zuHause> or know 07:44:15 <andythenorth> meh, cdist flooded my pax stations :| 07:46:06 <Alberth> work for andy :) 07:46:09 <Eddi|zuHause> yeah, it does that :p 07:46:36 <Eddi|zuHause> that's why i never get to do industrial networks 07:46:51 <Alberth> :D 07:47:06 <Alberth> just ignore cities, they're annoying anyway :) 07:47:41 <andythenorth> BB told me to do it :P 07:48:25 <Alberth> :O it created a chain of connections? 07:48:37 <Alberth> it doesn't even aim for that :) 07:52:19 <andythenorth> tol me to deliver pax :) 07:52:22 <andythenorth> +d 07:52:53 * andythenorth should stick to point-to-point networks :P 07:54:07 <andythenorth> bll 07:54:08 *** andythenorth has quit IRC 07:57:56 <Eddi|zuHause> point-to-point lines with single trains on each. best way to play the game 07:59:32 <Alberth> depending on your goal of playing :p 08:14:27 *** DDR has joined #openttd 08:22:20 *** Wolf01 has joined #openttd 08:22:29 <Wolf01> Moin 08:23:26 *** sim-al2 is now known as Guest4401 08:23:27 *** sim-al2 has joined #openttd 08:23:42 <Wolf01> V453000: https://www.packtpub.com/packt/offers/free-learning automate! 08:25:07 *** ic111 has joined #openttd 08:26:54 *** Guest4401 has quit IRC 08:28:53 <Alberth> o/ 08:38:09 *** supermop has quit IRC 08:45:10 <V453000> hm 08:45:45 <ic111> Alberth, answer here: https://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=63721&p=1191668#p1191668 08:45:53 <Eddi|zuHause> now, am i really missing something for this unorganized crime interview, or am i just not getting the rules? 08:48:10 <Eddi|zuHause> i mean, it offers me to skip it, but i solved all the other minigames before... 08:59:08 <milek7_> hm 08:59:16 <milek7_> how to change game script in running game? 08:59:34 *** supermop has joined #openttd 09:00:15 <Alberth> milek7_: not, I think 09:00:31 <Eddi|zuHause> ah, i found it :p 09:00:49 <Alberth> ic111: these start times and offsets don't show up elsewhere? 09:01:09 <milek7_> eh, so patching again 09:01:59 <Alberth> milek7_: there are reasons why you cannot do things 09:02:13 <Alberth> if things are safe to change, we generally allow it 09:06:13 *** ic111 has quit IRC 09:09:46 *** ic111 has joined #openttd 09:11:50 <ic111> (temporary lost connection, and https://webchat.oftc.net/?channels=openttd unfortunately doesn't always tell me about) 09:11:59 <ic111> Alberth: No, they don't show up elsewhere 09:12:21 <ic111> They are properties of the timetable (aka OrderList), and the vehicle 09:15:13 *** gelignite has joined #openttd 09:16:07 <Alberth> offset isn't really needed, it can be derived from the difference between start times 09:16:24 <Alberth> if you put them under each other, you gain lots of width 09:16:38 <ic111> No, it works the other way round: You specify the offset, and based on this, the vehicle start is calculated. 09:16:55 <ic111> I thought about removing one of (Timetable | Vehicle) start 09:17:23 <ic111> However, if I remove Vehicle start, then players don't have the start date relevant for the arrivals / departures below 09:17:26 <Eddi|zuHause> depending on your use case, you might need one more than the other 09:17:27 <Alberth> only vehicle start would qualify for removal, I think 09:17:57 <Alberth> so there is no vehicle departure anywhere? 09:18:09 <Alberth> ie first one would be equal to start, right? 09:18:39 <ic111> Below, you specify "Departure 3rd April 1905", and do this in terms of the *Vehicle* timetable. 09:19:00 <Alberth> don't think in implementation, user doesn't know or care 09:19:24 <Alberth> oh sorry, you meant something else 09:19:42 <milek7_> ok, game script can be changed in scenario editor 09:20:01 <ic111> Just because I think in terms of users, I allow them to input the departure of a particular vehicle in terms of the timetable of that particular vehicle. 09:20:26 <Wolf01> So, is the departure date vehicle based and tied to the next order? Why don't you just move it on the vehicle status bar (start/stop button) so you always see it at glance? 09:20:28 <ic111> But of course, in the background, I translate the departure into the range of the timetable, i.e. [Timetable start, Timetable start + length [ 09:20:31 *** Progman has joined #openttd 09:20:54 <ic111> based on the offset 09:21:28 <ic111> So, the Vehicle start is a piece of information players need IMHO 09:24:28 <Alberth> sure it's useful, but vehicle start time is not equal to first departure in the table? 09:25:41 <ic111> Alberth: No, in general not. 09:26:09 <Alberth> ok, add a first row that is? 09:26:32 <Alberth> just throwing suggestions 09:27:13 <ic111> I even don't actually enforce that dates are within the timetable range - I once did, but in my experience this just triggers tedious problems once you do things like shifting a timetable, editing start dates, and so on. Instead, I now mark orders with arrivals / departures outside the range [STart, start + length[ red. 09:27:38 <Alberth> I don't think you need "+" and "=". If a user sees the times, and cannot see how it's computed, I think he has no business doing time tables 09:29:16 <ic111> Wolf01: The departure dates exist once per Timetable, but what you see in a vehicle timetable in fact is [Departure in timetable + Vehicle offset]. I don't understand what you mean with "move it to status bar" 09:29:54 <Wolf01> I don't get timetables 09:30:14 <ic111> ask me questions ;-) 09:31:21 <Alberth> time tables make the assumption of a regulated schedule, which may not apply to the play style of a user 09:31:30 <Wolf01> I only use them for the most reliable thing: make vehicles wait n-days at a station 09:31:32 <Alberth> eg I never care about schedules 09:31:48 <__ln__> did you mean "n days" 09:32:04 <Wolf01> Load if available and wait for 5 days 09:33:21 <ic111> A frequent situation for me would be: Load if available, and depart once (given the overall setup of your network / timetables) you know that you have a free slot (i.e. no other train crosses your way) on the railway ahead 09:33:26 <Wolf01> It's the only thing I would save for timetables and move it directly on the orders options 09:36:22 <ic111> That maybe would improve your rating at a station, but it would not allow for setting up a network where you have control about, where your trains meet, where (and when) they quickly exchange freight / passengers, and so on 09:36:51 <Wolf01> I guess you even play with breakdowns disabled 09:36:58 <ic111> No I don't 09:37:27 <ic111> Actually, designing such a network with breakdowns on is a quite interesting / challenging task 09:38:00 <ic111> The key idea is that you always specify your departures with some additional time for the potential case of a breakdown in mind 09:38:37 <ic111> plus that you let vehicles wait an appropriate amount of time at the end station, to ensure that they can start on time into the reverse direction 09:39:33 <Wolf01> To me it's a concept that won't work, in my network trains already wait each other, I can have only 1 train per track anyway so they are forced on stations or waiting points/passing loops 09:41:33 <Alberth> breakdowns are not very bad by themselves, they only cause massive havoc if your network is too full 09:41:45 <Alberth> which never happens if you do careful planning 09:42:06 *** Celestar1 has joined #openttd 09:42:08 <ic111> ... and exactly that careful planning is the thing I do using timetables 09:42:30 <Alberth> unlike the usual playing style where you just throw a zillion trains onto one single giant network 09:43:33 <ic111> After all, if you have e.g. five or ten trains sharing the same timetable, how do you (without timetables) ensure that they never by an unprobable, but possible sequence of breakdowns cause a traffic jam at the one end of the network, and the station at the other end isn't serviced for half a year 09:43:44 <Alberth> I don't plan, but observe the train flow, and expand the network when breakdowns start to cause more waiting 09:44:07 *** Celestar has quit IRC 09:44:54 <Alberth> expanding the network is a lot of pain with time tables? 09:45:46 <ic111> Do you mean, introducing new railways / stations / trains, or you mean adding additional tracks / platforms? 09:46:45 <ic111> I mean, if I design a railways line as one-track-line, where trains meet at stations, and realize that I need a second track, then I just build it 09:46:46 <Alberth> my main cause is more stations or more trains, which both eventually lead to a busier network 09:47:41 <Wolf01> Also vehicles auto-separation is a weird concept since it's done at the first start, I never managed even to start vehicles on different dates, I can't think about when I need to add more vehicles, I usually do it by hand by starting new vehicles when I find a gap 09:47:45 <Alberth> as I don't plan, the trains will sort themselves out on any additional track 09:48:28 *** HerzogDeXtEr has joined #openttd 09:48:37 *** Wormnest has joined #openttd 09:48:51 <Alberth> but if you plan things, doesn't more trains cause havoc in the tables? 09:48:57 <Wolf01> <ic111> I mean, if I design a railways line as one-track-line, where trains meet at stations, and realize that I need a second track, then I just build it <- that is wrong, if you set the timetables right you won't need a second track even with 100 trains 09:49:36 *** orudge` has quit IRC 09:49:39 *** orudge` has joined #openttd 09:49:39 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o orudge` 09:49:46 <Alberth> there is an upper limit to the number of trains you can push onto a track Wolf01 :) 09:49:58 <ic111> More stations / trains: Well, I have fun with planning things, i.e. when I add an additional train with a new timetable, then I look, at which date do I have a gap, where it can depart at the station; or maybe, how do I need to change the departures of the other trains to allow for such a gap. 09:50:00 <Wolf01> Yes, but with timetables you make them wait 09:50:42 <ic111> Wolf01: There is a difference between, what theoretically works, and what works (with breakdowns enabled!) in practice. 09:51:37 <ic111> So, you might plan that your trains meet here and there, and then realize, that some have breakdowns, and that your plan just causes delays in practice (one train has a breakdown, arrives too late at a station, thus the opposite train cannot start on time, and the delays spread over the network) 09:51:55 <ic111> If something like this happens, then extending the infrastructure / more tracks is needed 09:52:00 <Alberth> ah, ok, makes sense ic111, constant planning and replanning :) 09:52:04 <Wolf01> So if you say you can know when a specific train uses a track, you should also know the throughput of your track and timetable trains correctly 09:55:26 <ic111> Wolf01: Breakdowns are a probabilistic concept. Also, stations not always produce the same amount of cargo (i.e. sometimes loading takes a day more or less), so it's somewhat experience-based, and in fact, for me this is part of the fun 09:55:51 <Wolf01> That's what I can't get about timetables 09:56:50 <Alberth> the fun is trying to get as close as you can to the max load on a track, while at the same time keeping all schedules 09:57:28 <Alberth> since the max load isn't a simple number, this is a difficult problem 09:58:47 <Alberth> or rather, challenging 09:59:26 <ic111> Another aspect is, that some delay is often ok, but once some event happens you might get a bigger problem 10:00:23 <Wolf01> For me is: if you use timetables you don't give a fuck about production, you just want your network running like a well oiled mechanism 10:00:38 <Alberth> it's not a simple "run smooth" -> "total chaos" sharp edge, it degrades as you approach the limit 10:00:45 <ic111> E.g., it might be ok, if your long-distance-train has 5 days delay, but once it has 10 days delay, the local train supposed to enter the line after the long distance train instead enters in front of it, and the long distance train suddenly has 30 days delay because it travels behind a slow train 10:01:41 <Alberth> Wolf01: you can care for production, just add more trains and don't use them fully 10:01:59 <Wolf01> Which is what I already do without timetables 10:02:49 <Alberth> nobody claimed that time tables are the only possible solution :) 10:02:56 <Wolf01> At least for vehicles, with trains won't work, with 3+ trains I already fill the network 10:03:15 <Alberth> :O 10:03:48 <ic111> I talk about connected rail networks, where 100 or more local, long distance and freight trains share the same tracks... 10:04:22 <ic111> ... and where a long distance train can only be fast if I ensure that it meets other trains that cause it to wait as seldom as possible 10:05:34 <Wolf01> If only there was a "depart after train 123 arrived at station" 10:07:11 <ic111> Basically, it's an incremental playing approach, I have timetables for all vehicles, the goal is that they are more or less on time, and when I change things, add new railways, add new stations, add new trains, then I (constant replanning) change things in a way that things still work afterwards 10:07:30 <Alberth> Wolf01: more likely you want "a train from blah group" 10:07:47 <Wolf01> Yes, could be 10:09:14 <Eddi|zuHause> people frequently request "leave if another train of the same group arrived" 10:09:52 <Eddi|zuHause> where "group" might mean "order list" 10:13:26 *** Hiddenfunstuff has joined #openttd 10:14:01 *** orudge` has quit IRC 10:14:28 *** orudge` has joined #openttd 10:14:28 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o orudge` 10:20:37 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd 10:23:05 <Wolf01> BTW, I think if timetables will be merged to the orders list and not having their own window, and the single orders could be collapsed/expanded like the station cargo list with cdist enabled, then it might be more usable, yes the UI will be a lot cluttered but you have everything in one place and you can hide the things you won't use 10:23:18 <andythenorth> ow 10:23:22 <Wolf01> o/ 10:23:47 <andythenorth> don’t you like having two entirely separate concepts for controlling vehicle behaviour? :P 10:24:05 * andythenorth still doesn’t understand how waiting for 10 days over-rides the full-load order 10:24:19 <Wolf01> No, because I would like the waiting time at station in the order list and don't use anything else of timetables 10:24:33 <ic111> In fact the timetable window I implemented has easily accessible buttons top-right specifying "Show timetable + Order info", "Show timetable info", and "Show order info" 10:24:49 <Alberth> andy, it needs a toggle somewhere in the orders 10:25:06 <andythenorth> it breaks my brain :) 10:25:11 <andythenorth> I will leave you to it :) 10:25:12 <ic111> But it wasn't meant as complete replacement for the traditional order window in the first place (although all the functionality is available) 10:25:17 * andythenorth playing Busy Bee game 10:25:21 <Alberth> the entire order stuff is beyond limits of what you can express nicely, currently 10:25:27 <andythenorth> please please please don’t make it worse anyone :( 10:25:41 <ic111> wasn't my attempt :-) 10:26:14 <Alberth> ic111: given the amount of duplicate information, it would make sense to merge them 10:26:31 <Alberth> but the orders need work too, they are too limited 10:26:46 <ic111> As I have said, in terms of functionality merging is possible 10:26:52 * andythenorth still doesn’t understand the purpose 10:26:56 <Alberth> and merging would explode your patch, likely 10:27:03 <ic111> But I understand if people who don't like timetables just want to keep the usual orders window 10:27:24 <ic111> Thus I was very reluctant to do so 10:27:41 <Alberth> it would need some way to hide timing information, basically 10:28:02 <Wolf01> I would like a better orders window, but I can't find a purpose for timetables in my play style 10:28:20 <Alberth> likely there isn't a use for you 10:28:30 <Alberth> but it's a way of playing the game 10:28:41 <Alberth> ie much like RL trains run 10:28:54 <ic111> Basically, the way are the "Full", "Time", "Dest" buttons in the upper right section of my window 10:29:01 <Alberth> I wouldn't use them either 10:29:03 <andythenorth> my view of timetables is somewhat distorted 10:29:16 <andythenorth> I only tried them for ships, and they just don’t work for ships 10:29:28 * andythenorth should open some FS about that 10:29:29 <ic111> Time currently means, "Show only the timetable lines", "Dest" means show only the destination = order lines, and Full means, "show both kinds of lines" 10:29:29 <Alberth> :O 10:29:29 <andythenorth> :P 10:29:56 <andythenorth> this was interesting reading recently http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2349257 10:29:59 <Alberth> and ships is the simplest, as they can pass eachother 10:30:05 <andythenorth> and also Raymond’s reply http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6737 10:34:06 <ic111> Probably, attempting to really merge those windows in this patch is just too much, then I not only have a discussion about timetables, but also one about every single feature of the orders window 10:34:54 <ic111> Though the current situation, that I have a timetable window where all the functionality of the orders window can be reached, can be a good starting point for eventually doing so 10:35:44 * andythenorth wonders if there’s no other way to space vehicles out 10:35:49 *** sla_ro|master has joined #openttd 10:36:12 <Alberth> make an invisible wagon :p 10:36:30 <ic111> It's not only about spacing; but you might read the log of this channel of today, just before you entered it. 10:36:32 <Alberth> A trick I sometimes use is to have a single very long block 10:37:04 <Alberth> or rather just a block equal to the desired distance 10:37:51 <Alberth> extending the orders is going to be very very messy, I think 10:38:17 <ic111> What do you mean with "extending the orders"? 10:38:34 <Wolf01> Mmmh, I think I have a problem... I see the same vehicles twice in the replace vehicles window 10:38:50 <Alberth> multi-cargo transfers at a single station eg 10:39:20 <ic111> You mean specifying which cargo should be unloaded / loaded to another vehicle? 10:39:32 <Wolf01> Oh, I loaded egrvts twice for an unknown reason 10:39:37 <Alberth> only unload coal (but keep the wood), load stones 10:39:45 <Wolf01> Broken game... :( 10:39:57 <Alberth> :p 10:40:12 <Alberth> grf doesn't detect double instantiation :p 10:40:20 <ic111> Such things make the orders line longer and longer, and need GUI work 10:40:46 <Alberth> I think you need to split to simpler orders, and have several 10:41:03 <Alberth> rather than trying to cram everything in a single line 10:41:27 <Alberth> ie loading has nothing to do with unloading or driving to the next station 10:41:27 <ic111> Basically the concept one uses for timetables 10:42:06 <Alberth> so why not have some sequence of small orders that can be done in parallel if it makes sense 10:42:24 <ic111> Basically, we talk about the visual design here 10:42:36 <ic111> not necessarily about orders in a technical sense 10:42:53 <Alberth> I'd do that also in the back-end 10:43:20 * andythenorth reading log 10:43:30 <Alberth> or you will end up with some extension, and then again run into limitations as the back-end is not flexible enough 10:44:00 <Alberth> obviously this totally flips all order code upside down :p 10:44:02 <andythenorth> I know we banned UI scripting (I found it an old thread about it in forums recently) 10:44:05 <andythenorth> but e 10:44:17 <andythenorth> eh, that might need rethought :P 10:44:27 <andythenorth> timetables would be much better handled out of the core game 10:44:27 <ic111> Things that can be specified multiple times (e.g. your "load that cargo, undload that cargo") are an 1:n relation, that needs redesign in the backend 10:44:33 <Alberth> users now can program, suddenly? 10:45:07 <Alberth> ic111: yep, total replace would it be, I think 10:45:28 <Alberth> takes a few years at least 10:45:59 <ic111> But something like the arrival or the departure is just a value in the Order structure, I don't see why moving this to a different place in the backend should be necessary 10:46:23 <andythenorth> Alberth: they manage to assemble newgrfs :P 10:47:12 <Alberth> sure, arrival and departure are the simple things 10:47:41 <Alberth> although hard-coded override of 10 waiting days... isn't understood by all 10:48:04 <Alberth> so likely there is more room for configuring behavior if you want 10:48:46 <Alberth> andythenorth: yes some do, but that doesn't mean the majority of the users 10:50:28 <ic111> If you really want to approach a total redesign, then you need to agree first on the big picture (i.e., which order properties should be supported in the long term?), and then you can gradually refactor things towards that goal 10:50:47 <andythenorth> the puzzle for me is how to design something with integrity 10:51:09 <andythenorth> where the goals are unclear, and few people understand them 10:51:18 <Alberth> ic111: I know, I re-implemented 120+ windows 10:52:05 <andythenorth> it was fun recently asking players about daylength 10:52:19 <andythenorth> learning was that there isn’t one idea of daylength 10:52:38 <Wolf01> I have 3 ideas of daylength 10:52:46 <andythenorth> so even making daylength technically viable doesn’t meet wishes 10:53:08 <andythenorth> daylength could be done in newgrf, with a handful of factors 10:53:21 <andythenorth> timetables don’t work in newgrf, but eh 10:53:31 * andythenorth wonders if the primary goal can be stated 10:53:49 <ic111> of a potential refactoring? 10:54:00 <andythenorth> just even of timetables 10:54:26 <andythenorth> I know of multiple player goals, but listing those isn’t quite same 10:54:41 <andythenorth> - spacing out buses in town 10:54:46 <andythenorth> - modelling real-life networks 10:54:55 <andythenorth> - optimising network use + flow 10:55:15 <ic111> Speaking of my concept: 10:55:30 <andythenorth> - proxy for ‘partial load' 10:55:56 <andythenorth> - triggering station delivery of cargo on first run of route, to ensure vehicle makes money 10:56:01 <ic111> Spacing out buses can be done - just choose an arbitrary start date, use autofill if you want, or specify departures explicitely, and then build vehicles with different offsets 10:56:57 <ic111> If you have vehicles with offsets 0, 1, 2, 3 months, and the timetable length is four months, and set the departures accordingly (either by autofill, or manually), then you will have buses that run approximately in one month distance 10:57:45 <ic111> Modelling real-life networks: Well, about what I described above; I control which train is where at which time, and where train meet, and when a long distance train enters a line shortly before a local train, and such things 10:58:54 <ic111> Optimizing network use + flow: At least, my attempt is that once a train left at a station it has to stop as seldom as possible at signals 10:59:22 <ic111> But of course, you need some concrete example in order to really talk about this 10:59:54 <ic111> proxy of partial load I don't understand 11:00:03 <Wolf01> The problem with spacing vehicles is that, as I said, you need to fix it continuously by hand, it would be cool that timetable recalculates the times based on the number of vehicles sharing the schedule, but that would conflicts with any other use of timetables 11:00:46 <ic111> Wolf01: Doing this automatically is a very very hard problem in computational sense 11:01:29 <ic111> I mean, I can detect that a train was late, but determining why it was late... hard 11:01:52 <andythenorth> ic111: proxy of partial load <- setting wait ’n’ days is equivalent to load x% 11:02:21 <ic111> Ah, then this basically is no application of timetables 11:02:25 <andythenorth> because load x% isn’t provided, so timetables are ~essential for that (or I have to provide different vehicle choices) 11:02:45 <andythenorth> it’s emergent behaviour, which has become “vital”, as much as anything is vital in a game about pixel trains :P 11:03:08 <ic111> I mean, if you solve this using timetables, then you implicitely assume that loading occurs in a certain speed 11:03:13 <andythenorth> yes 11:03:35 <Wolf01> I don't think so, you can estimate the travel time with manhattan distance between orders and average vehicle speed, then divide per number of vehicles, cache it and recalculate only when the number or type of vehicle changes, you can account also for an offset as roads aren't always built perfectly and you might have breakdowns 11:05:12 <ic111> Triggering station deliver of cargo on first run - how is this related with timetables? 11:05:15 <Wolf01> ic111: I'm not speaking of fine tuning the timetable to keep vehicles in sync to the single second and pixel, it's just an estimation of the time it takes, simple math average 11:05:37 <ic111> What about autofill? 11:05:56 <Wolf01> Autofill can go wrong for every kind of reason, I don't even rely on it 11:06:06 <ic111> I also use it quite seldom 11:06:16 <andythenorth> ic111: if the vehicles are set to wait n days on first run, they are less likely to travel empty, so they make money immediately 11:06:31 <ic111> Ok, this kind of optimization 11:07:59 <ic111> Such a temporary change can be done either by temporarily changing the timetable, or by a temporary full-load-phase 11:08:02 <ic111> IMHO 11:08:27 <ic111> I personally usually don't care too much about the first round of the vehicle 11:09:34 <Wolf01> I usually set up the orders and forget, I don't want to keep an eye on them because stuff needs to be fine-tuned continuously 11:09:53 <andythenorth> I set buses and trams quite often to wait 5 days or so 11:10:00 <andythenorth> more especially big pax ships 11:10:04 <andythenorth> at every station 11:10:24 <andythenorth> full load is no good, especially on asymmetric routes 11:10:34 <andythenorth> e.g. 500pax ship stopping at a tiny village 11:10:52 <andythenorth> so that is _my_ primary goal for timetables :) 11:10:56 <andythenorth> but eh 11:12:04 <ic111> If you want that 5 days permanently, you (in my patch), especially for ships which cannot wait at red signals, can use autofill if you want to keep things simple 11:12:33 <ic111> Or, if you don't want to have time permanently you always have to do something once you don't want them any longer 11:15:08 *** adf88 has quit IRC 11:18:14 *** ToBeFree has joined #openttd 11:29:17 *** ToBeFree has quit IRC 11:29:23 *** ToBeFree has joined #openttd 11:38:07 <andythenorth> it’s so weird building newgrf airports :) 11:38:11 <andythenorth> non-standard orientations 11:54:21 <Alberth> :) 11:58:33 <Wolf01> <ic111> If you want that 5 days permanently, you (in my patch) [...] can use autofill if you want to keep things simple <- wat!? 12:06:39 *** ic111 has quit IRC 12:07:35 *** ic111 has joined #openttd 12:09:00 *** ic111 has quit IRC 12:37:32 *** ic111 has joined #openttd 12:37:56 *** ic111_ has joined #openttd 12:38:44 *** ic111__ has joined #openttd 12:38:57 *** ic111 has quit IRC 12:39:21 *** ic111_ has quit IRC 12:39:35 *** ic111__ has quit IRC 12:39:49 *** ic111 has joined #openttd 12:41:14 *** ic111 has quit IRC 12:41:41 *** frosch123 has joined #openttd 13:00:37 <andythenorth> quak 13:01:09 <frosch123> moo 13:02:45 <andythenorth> https://bugs.openttd.org/task/6207 13:02:51 <andythenorth> ^ plausible this will be fixed? 13:03:08 <andythenorth> I don’t mind either way, but I need to delete some vehicles from IH if not 13:03:11 <andythenorth> [which is fine] 13:05:28 <frosch123> i wouldn't know what a correct behaviour would be, unless you want template-based replacement 13:08:00 * andythenorth doesn’t know either 13:08:14 <andythenorth> easiest to avoid it by not creating those vehicles 13:08:21 <andythenorth> codeless code :P 13:09:42 <frosch123> is the report about it being a *slient* failure, i..e do they want a more noticeable alert? 13:10:28 * andythenorth proposes that mixed articulated vehicles are just banned 13:10:33 <andythenorth> nuclear option 13:10:45 <andythenorth> they’re not needed 13:25:32 *** orudge` has quit IRC 13:25:45 *** orudge` has joined #openttd 13:25:45 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o orudge` 13:27:03 *** Gja has joined #openttd 13:33:30 *** adf88 has joined #openttd 13:34:03 <andythenorth> oops 13:34:13 <andythenorth> Iron Horse might be getting un-simple :| 13:44:05 <andythenorth> classic 13:44:37 <frosch123> classic would be a wooden horse 13:50:46 <andythenorth> ha 13:50:58 <andythenorth> _probably_ I should delete the dual power electro-diesel train 13:51:06 <andythenorth> and definitely not add more of them 13:52:01 <frosch123> why? it's an interesting graphical gimmick 13:53:08 <andythenorth> not sure I’ve ever used it in a game :) 14:01:33 * andythenorth keeps it :P 14:02:21 <DorpsGek> Commit by adf88 :: r27913 trunk/src/console_cmds.cpp (2017-09-10 16:02:13 +0200 ) 14:02:22 <DorpsGek> -Fix: 'unban' console command was not handling IPv6 adresses properly 14:03:21 <andythenorth> :) 14:03:36 <DorpsGek> Commit by adf88 :: r27914 trunk/src/console_cmds.cpp (2017-09-10 16:03:29 +0200 ) 14:03:37 <DorpsGek> -Fix/Feature: 'unban' console command - fix invalid help text and be more verbose 14:03:54 <Eddi|zuHause> a fixfeature? 14:04:52 <adf88> yep 14:05:09 <adf88> a bit awkward, I know 14:08:56 <adf88> what do you think about too big national letters (sprite font) 14:08:57 <adf88> https://bugs.openttd.org/task/6620 14:09:10 <adf88> do you find any intention in being so big? 14:10:18 *** orudge` has quit IRC 14:10:26 *** orudge` has joined #openttd 14:10:26 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o orudge` 14:10:47 <andythenorth> haven’t tried to repro 14:10:53 <andythenorth> dunno which base set 14:11:00 <andythenorth> looks like a bug, but eh 14:11:25 <adf88> almost all dictricts are affected 14:11:33 <adf88> diacritics 14:12:35 <adf88> they are here: media/extra_grf/chars.png 14:12:48 <andythenorth> someone just drew it wrong? 14:13:39 <andythenorth> or are they supposed to be scaled down in code? 14:13:41 <LordAro> i'd imagine they date from a time when the boxes were fixed height 14:26:31 *** sim-al2 has quit IRC 14:41:12 *** Flygon has quit IRC 14:44:00 <frosch123> adf88: are you using opengfx or original? 14:44:18 <adf88> that depends 14:44:20 <adf88> both 14:44:55 <frosch123> i wondered whether it got broken when openttd.grf became the fallback for missing sprites, so it would mix standard letters from opengfx with diacritics from openttd.grf 14:45:30 <frosch123> so, most interesting is whehther it works when using spritefont and oriiginal baseset 14:47:36 <frosch123> or in other words: is one specific baseset broken, or does ottd mix basesets? 14:47:39 <adf88> i wasn't using opengfx 14:48:09 <adf88> I was referring to the original base set only 14:48:20 <adf88> what does it have to do with opengfx? 14:48:35 <frosch123> basesets define the glyphs for the sprite font 14:48:40 <frosch123> opengfx has its own 14:50:23 <adf88> anyway, original graphic set contains only some diacritics, and their sizes are fine 14:50:55 <frosch123> so, is it abuot not using the sprite font? 14:51:32 <frosch123> adf88: my problem is, that there are like 24 combinations for where those sprites originate from 14:51:48 <frosch123> and noone states which combination is broken 14:52:47 <adf88> heh, you are better since I have 0 14:52:48 <adf88> :) 14:53:10 <adf88> I have no clue where they came from 14:53:34 <frosch123> there are characters in baseset, in baseset extra grf, in openttd.grf and in non-sprite fonts 14:54:14 <frosch123> when i tried, i did not find a combination that fails 14:54:14 <Eddi|zuHause> non-sprite font, and that font's fallback font for when the character is not available... 14:55:11 <Eddi|zuHause> likely os-specific 14:55:24 <Eddi|zuHause> but i have no clue how stuff works 14:55:25 <adf88> I think we can just find some open font and make characters smaller in characters.png 14:55:43 <adf88> the fallback character from original TTD grafix are irrelevant 14:55:45 <frosch123> characters.png works just fine for me 14:55:59 <frosch123> .... why can noone just state which combination causes it... :( 14:55:59 <adf88> these characters are too big 14:56:24 <adf88> in chars.png 14:56:29 <frosch123> they are not too big 14:56:31 <adf88> which is openttd.grf 14:56:40 <adf88> not? 14:56:51 *** sla_ro|master has quit IRC 14:57:01 <adf88> moment please... 14:58:34 <adf88> they are! 14:58:50 <adf88> I mean that they should be smaller 14:58:58 <adf88> because original TTD letters are smaller 14:59:05 <adf88> like the FS says 14:59:21 <frosch123> http://devs.openttd.org/~frosch/pure_original.png <- this is what it looks like when using the original baseset, only spritefont 14:59:24 <frosch123> it looks just right 15:00:01 <frosch123> you and the reporter use some different fonts 15:00:05 <frosch123> maybe non-sprite fonts? 15:00:10 <frosch123> but they worked for me as well 15:00:16 <adf88> no 15:00:23 <andythenorth> basic Steeltown network http://dev.openttdcoop.org/attachments/download/8605/steeltown_network.png 15:00:23 <adf88> they are just too big 15:00:24 <Eddi|zuHause> the screenshot in the bug report clearly uses a different font 15:00:25 <adf88> they are 15:00:54 <frosch123> adf88: my screenshot shows the sprites from chars.png, they look just right 15:01:01 <frosch123> i have no idea what the fs screenshot shows 15:01:08 <adf88> OK 15:01:12 <adf88> I see 15:01:37 <andythenorth> what font is used in the report? 15:01:43 <andythenorth> unusual T char 15:01:44 <adf88> sprite font 15:01:51 <frosch123> apparently not 15:01:52 <adf88> original base set 15:01:55 <frosch123> because sprite font works 15:02:03 <adf88> not to mee 15:02:04 <Eddi|zuHause> maybe spanish has some characters that the sprite font misses, and thus switches automatically to non-sprite font? 15:02:17 <andythenorth> this is not the base set font I have https://bugs.openttd.org/task/6620/getfile/10849/ottd_large_sprite_font_different_character_size.png 15:02:28 <andythenorth> nor is it the chars in openttd.grf 15:02:32 <andythenorth> the T is highly distinctive 15:02:36 <frosch123> adf88: can you "killall -6 openttd"? 15:02:50 <frosch123> the crashdump should state exactly whether a sprite font is used or not 15:03:29 * andythenorth proposes just asking James in 6620, and waiting :P 15:03:40 <andythenorth> but maybe some of you like mystery puzzles more than me :) 15:04:16 <andythenorth> where do I get the sprite font? 15:04:27 <frosch123> you do not use a non-sprite font :p 15:04:37 <andythenorth> how do I do that? 15:04:42 <frosch123> and you do not use a weird language that forces a non-sprite font 15:05:02 <Eddi|zuHause> the least he should do is upload his openttd.cfg and possibly his savegame 15:05:45 * andythenorth bored, back to my BB game 15:10:10 <adf88> ok, it's strange, now I can't reproduce it 15:11:14 <adf88> in this FS, I think it may be some fallback indeed, not sure what caused this 15:11:43 <adf88> I'll try breaking some fonts :> 15:19:48 <frosch123> https://bugs.openttd.org/task/6620 <- that's what I would need to know 15:20:18 <andythenorth> :) 15:20:32 <adf88> I agree, on the screenshot the font is not the sprite font 15:20:43 <adf88> these character are not sprites anywhere 15:20:47 <adf88> they were rendered 15:21:03 <adf88> but diacritics where not 15:21:08 <adf88> all appears to be so 15:21:23 <adf88> it might have to do something with font detection code 15:23:54 <frosch123> well, it also worked for me when switching to chinese 15:24:32 <frosch123> maybe it's the 9x build without icu :p 15:24:48 <frosch123> so many unknown variables :) 15:24:52 <Eddi|zuHause> maybe it's a newgrf which overrides the sprite font... 15:25:00 <Eddi|zuHause> but not all of it... 15:26:12 *** Cubey has joined #openttd 15:29:22 <andythenorth> something more interesting? o_O https://bugs.openttd.org/task/6469 15:29:55 <andythenorth> the station icon for FIRS Explosives uses animated palette :P 15:30:02 <andythenorth> would be nice to see it 15:30:09 <frosch123> it's on position 5 of the list, so may be done in 25 weeks 15:30:15 <frosch123> :p 15:30:33 <andythenorth> :) 15:30:42 <andythenorth> can’t Eddi|zuHause review it? :P 15:32:48 <adf88> looks interesting, i have no seee3 :) 15:32:56 <frosch123> andythenorth: eddi is busy figuring out whether neko and syl are the same person 15:40:09 <andythenorth> vital job 15:40:41 <andythenorth> SYL needs some sig reduction 15:41:06 * andythenorth so much newgrf to do 15:41:13 <andythenorth> at least enough until 2020 or so 15:41:19 <andythenorth> FS holiday is over 15:41:39 <andythenorth> low score was 342, now people are adding more :P 15:47:07 <frosch123> andythenorth: can i add more wiki pages? 15:48:16 *** Pilot has joined #openttd 16:06:37 *** dP has joined #openttd 16:06:40 *** dP is now known as _dp_ 16:08:21 <adf88> go ehed 16:08:26 <adf88> ehead 16:08:33 <adf88> head 16:08:40 <adf88> thamn keybrd 16:08:47 <Wolf01> You were looking for "ahead"? 16:08:57 <adf88> yes, thanks 16:09:04 <adf88> need to buy a new keyboard :P 16:09:26 <frosch123> cheaper than new hands 16:09:27 <adf88> keys are popping off, it's time 16:09:47 <Wolf01> https://i.redditmedia.com/lUax1pSvxU45z57HLzIy_6AUQSIPSCVMbDTKe3Yroso.png?w=628&s=2a7c69f5efeec14a73dc1c07414a0c97 adf88 16:13:53 <adf88> classic Windows keyboard is nicer :p http://stevenharman.net/images/posts/ctrl-alt-del.gif 16:15:20 <andythenorth> frosch123: I just couldn’t get into the wiki game :P 16:17:55 <andythenorth> no obvious way to win 16:29:42 *** Pilot has quit IRC 16:39:21 *** Gja has quit IRC 16:45:46 *** orudge` has quit IRC 16:46:00 *** orudge` has joined #openttd 16:46:00 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o orudge` 16:55:23 *** glx has joined #openttd 16:55:23 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v glx 17:04:11 *** bipul has joined #openttd 17:04:23 *** Gja has joined #openttd 17:06:07 *** Maraxus has joined #openttd 17:06:41 *** bipul has left #openttd 17:10:49 <andythenorth> stone is over-demanded http://bundles.openttdcoop.org/firs/push/LATEST/docs/html/economies.html#steeltown 17:11:09 *** Gja has quit IRC 17:11:14 *** Biolunar_ has quit IRC 17:11:24 <andythenorth> it’s required at all 3 of the main iron/steel producing industries 17:11:32 <andythenorth> (indirectly in 2 of them as quicklime) 17:11:48 *** ic111 has joined #openttd 17:13:13 *** ic111 has quit IRC 17:13:33 <Eddi|zuHause> Wolf01: just a coincidence that the comment is by "A. Wolf"? :p 17:13:43 <andythenorth> rest of the economy is remarkably balanced, stone is a bit sucky in comparison 17:13:46 <Wolf01> Yes, totally 17:19:08 <andythenorth> add more stone-producers? o_O :P 17:23:33 *** ic111 has joined #openttd 17:25:04 *** Maraxus has quit IRC 17:25:30 <andythenorth> dolomite mine? 17:25:46 <Wolf01> Without dolomites? 17:26:25 <Wolf01> BBL 17:26:29 <andythenorth> :) 17:26:52 <andythenorth> realism 17:26:59 <andythenorth> limestone isn’t sea-dredged :| 17:27:06 <andythenorth> there are no sea industries in this economy 17:41:49 <Alberth> I didn't have lack of stones 17:42:01 <Alberth> you can't just give each industry a little less? 17:42:06 <andythenorth> maybe 17:42:16 <Alberth> gung ho only asks that you deliver some 17:42:28 <Alberth> iirc :p 17:43:00 <andythenorth> I wonder if the problem is actually that it’s a bit boring 17:43:17 <andythenorth> three furnace industries, all need a stone derivative 18:04:25 <Eddi|zuHause> i was in the dolomites once 18:04:39 <Eddi|zuHause> very pointy 18:09:49 *** SimYouLater has joined #openttd 18:10:31 <ic111> ... but not implementable using the slope concept of OpenTTD^^ 18:11:18 <SimYouLater> Is there a reason I would suddenly be logged off while using the forums? I'm worried someone may have gotten into my passwords when my computer got infected, but it might also be nothing since I've been logged in with "remember me" for awhile. 18:11:48 <SimYouLater> I only have had time to change my important passwords. 18:12:22 <andythenorth> hmm 18:12:31 <andythenorth> probably can’t add magnesite 18:12:48 <andythenorth> already got manganese, too confusing, at least in English 18:14:15 *** ic111 has quit IRC 18:16:31 *** chomwitt has quit IRC 18:18:50 *** SimYouLater has quit IRC 18:42:25 *** quiznilo has joined #openttd 18:43:07 *** frosch123 has quit IRC 18:48:24 *** tycoondemon has quit IRC 18:48:38 *** tycoondemon has joined #openttd 18:49:45 *** orudge` has quit IRC 18:49:58 *** orudge` has joined #openttd 18:49:58 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o orudge` 18:53:21 <Eddi|zuHause> make an economy where all cargos start with M 18:55:26 <Eddi|zuHause> oha, thimbleweed park is on sale 18:56:33 <glx> but only -33% 18:56:45 <Eddi|zuHause> well, it's a fairly new game 18:57:24 <milek7_> good game, but disappointing ending 18:57:44 <Eddi|zuHause> i know nothing about the ending 18:58:03 <glx> and I don't want to kown 18:58:11 <andythenorth> Magnesium, Metal, Manganese, Milk, Microchips 18:58:35 <Eddi|zuHause> Müsli 18:58:49 <andythenorth> Mutton 18:58:59 <andythenorth> Maps 18:59:11 <andythenorth> 32 random M from dictionary? 18:59:16 <Eddi|zuHause> Military Supplies 19:00:48 <Eddi|zuHause> anyway, i have a headache that has been getting worse since noon :/ 19:01:10 <Eddi|zuHause> and i didn't get any further in deponia 19:04:37 <andythenorth> hmm 19:04:55 <andythenorth> swapped a newgrf cargo on a running game :P 19:05:03 <andythenorth> works so far 19:26:12 *** FLHerne has quit IRC 19:26:40 *** FLHerne has joined #openttd 19:52:31 *** Alberth has left #openttd 19:53:32 *** JGR__ has quit IRC 20:15:10 *** gelignite has quit IRC 20:27:30 *** sim-al2 has joined #openttd 20:38:52 *** chomwitt has joined #openttd 20:58:10 *** andythenorth has quit IRC 21:18:40 *** Wormnest has quit IRC 21:22:25 <Wolf01> Mmmh, maybe it's time to go to bed early 21:50:08 *** HerzogDeXtEr1 has joined #openttd 21:54:16 *** HerzogDeXtEr has quit IRC 22:05:02 *** tokai has joined #openttd 22:05:02 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v tokai 22:11:56 *** tokai|noir has quit IRC 22:22:27 *** D-HUND has quit IRC 22:23:31 *** debdog has joined #openttd 22:25:02 *** HerzogDeXtEr has joined #openttd 22:30:26 *** HerzogDeXtEr1 has quit IRC 22:35:12 *** adf88 has quit IRC 22:42:46 *** chomwitt has quit IRC 23:11:27 *** HerzogDeXtEr has quit IRC 23:25:31 *** orudge` has quit IRC 23:25:51 *** orudge` has joined #openttd 23:25:51 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o orudge` 23:30:01 *** Progman has quit IRC 23:35:10 *** FLHerne has quit IRC 23:47:06 *** Smedles has quit IRC 23:47:07 <Wolf01> So, bed early... ok... 'night :P 23:47:16 *** Wolf01 has quit IRC