Times are UTC Toggle Colours
00:01:31 *** Brianetta [~brian@188-220-91-30.zone11.bethere.co.uk] has quit [Quit: TschÃŒÃ] 00:02:28 *** lobstah [~michielbi@86.89.201.189] has joined #openttd 00:07:28 *** lobstar [~michielbi@86.89.201.189] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 00:10:17 <dihedral> @fs 2585 00:10:18 <DorpsGek> dihedral: http://bugs.openttd.org/task/2585 00:12:46 *** X-2 [~X-2@5ED67292.cm-7-7b.dynamic.ziggo.nl] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 00:14:14 *** elho [elho@psycho.elho.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 00:18:01 *** KenjiE20 [~KenjiE20@92.22.66.123] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 0.3.3] 00:26:34 *** Fast2 [~Fast2@p57AF996C.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 00:34:30 *** avdg [~avdg@94-227-100-192.access.telenet.be] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 00:48:04 *** KritiK [~Maxim@95-26-15-162.broadband.corbina.ru] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 00:51:21 *** Fuco [~dota.keys@fuco.sks3.muni.cz] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 00:57:55 *** elho [elho@psycho.elho.net] has joined #openttd 01:14:37 *** elho [elho@psycho.elho.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 01:14:49 *** HerzogDeXtEr [~Flex@89.246.163.220] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 01:39:16 *** fanioz [~fanioz@180.214.233.18] has joined #openttd 01:39:47 <fanioz> morning 01:46:12 *** Keiya [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has joined #openttd 01:51:47 *** Keiya_ [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 02:27:59 *** Lachie_ [whitey@creep.bur.st] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 02:31:37 *** nicfer [~nicfer@190.50.33.196] has joined #openttd 02:34:46 *** nicfer [~nicfer@190.50.33.196] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 02:51:24 *** DDR [~DDR@66.183.113.224] has joined #openttd 02:55:53 *** Pulec [~pulec@static-cl093181068250.unet.cz] has quit [] 03:24:35 *** glx [glx@2a01:e35:2f59:c7c0:7137:b4e9:9a69:4642] has quit [Quit: bye] 03:32:01 *** llugo [~lugo@mgdb-4db8fac9.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #openttd 03:34:58 *** trebuchet [~Trebuchet@69.51.104.87] has joined #openttd 03:36:38 *** ecke [~ecke@188.75.128.2] has quit [Quit: more listen, more understand, more know] 03:39:18 *** lugo [~lugo@mgdb-4db8f5d3.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 03:43:38 *** DDR [~DDR@66.183.113.224] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 03:50:51 *** xiong [~xiong@netblock-68-183-253-3.dslextreme.com] has joined #openttd 03:57:57 *** Xrufuian [~Xrufuian@pool-98-119-100-9.lsanca.btas.verizon.net] has joined #openttd 04:02:11 *** roboboy [~robotboy@CPE-58-173-41-16.nxzp1.ken.bigpond.net.au] has joined #openttd 04:24:05 *** Keiya_ [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has joined #openttd 04:31:32 *** Keiya [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 04:48:00 *** roboboy [~robotboy@CPE-58-173-41-16.nxzp1.ken.bigpond.net.au] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 04:54:22 *** Eddi|zuHause [~johekr@p54B74AD2.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 04:54:39 *** Eddi|zuHause [~johekr@p54B76E28.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #openttd 04:55:52 *** xiong [~xiong@netblock-68-183-253-3.dslextreme.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 04:55:56 *** fanioz [~fanioz@180.214.233.18] has quit [Quit: need to reboot] 05:00:53 *** llugo [~lugo@mgdb-4db8fac9.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:02:39 *** fanioz [~fanioz@180.214.232.6] has joined #openttd 05:11:49 *** Keiya [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has joined #openttd 05:19:26 *** Keiya_ [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 05:40:05 *** Kurimus [Kurimus@dsl-tkubrasgw1-fe83de00-38.dhcp.inet.fi] has joined #openttd 05:53:08 <planetmaker> good morning 05:55:53 *** Keiya_ [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has joined #openttd 06:01:56 *** Keiya [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 06:06:43 *** KouDy [~KouDy@188.75.190.58] has joined #openttd 06:07:39 *** andythenorth_ [~andy@host217-43-130-207.range217-43.btcentralplus.com] has joined #openttd 06:09:51 *** roboboy [~robotboy@CPE-58-173-41-16.nxzp1.ken.bigpond.net.au] has joined #openttd 06:13:46 *** andythenorth__ [~andy@host217-43-130-207.range217-43.btcentralplus.com] has joined #openttd 06:13:46 *** andythenorth_ [~andy@host217-43-130-207.range217-43.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 06:19:18 <Terkhen> good morning 06:20:18 <andythenorth__> hi hi 06:20:25 * andythenorth__ recodes HEQS 06:26:56 *** andythenorth_ [~andy@host217-43-130-207.range217-43.btcentralplus.com] has joined #openttd 06:26:56 *** andythenorth__ [~andy@host217-43-130-207.range217-43.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 06:26:58 *** ^Spike^ [~spike@d200003.upc-d.chello.nl] has joined #openttd 06:33:01 <KouDy> morning 06:34:16 *** ar3k [~ident@87-239-75-101.internetia.net.pl] has joined #openttd 06:35:29 <Xrufuian> g'night 06:35:33 *** Xrufuian [~Xrufuian@pool-98-119-100-9.lsanca.btas.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: User quit] 06:37:46 *** Keiya [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has joined #openttd 06:37:46 *** Keiya_ [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 06:40:22 *** KouDy [~KouDy@188.75.190.58] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 06:40:37 *** Keiya_ [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has joined #openttd 06:40:45 *** andythenorth_ [~andy@host217-43-130-207.range217-43.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 06:41:23 *** trebuchet [~Trebuchet@69.51.104.87] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 06:41:25 *** KouDy [~KouDy@188.75.190.58] has joined #openttd 06:43:33 *** KouDy [~KouDy@188.75.190.58] has quit [] 06:44:05 *** KouDy [~KouDy@188.75.190.58] has joined #openttd 06:47:53 *** Keiya [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 07:07:07 *** Zuu [~Zuu@2.66.7.161] has joined #openttd 07:09:14 *** andythenorth_ [~andy@host217-43-130-207.range217-43.btcentralplus.com] has joined #openttd 07:19:08 *** fanioz [~fanioz@180.214.232.6] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 07:19:40 *** last_evolution [~last_evol@ip-86-49-60-58.net.upcbroadband.cz] has joined #openttd 07:21:12 *** fanioz [~fanioz@180.214.233.20] has joined #openttd 07:34:16 <dihedral> hmmmz 07:36:42 *** Keiya_ [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 07:37:03 *** Keiya_ [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has joined #openttd 07:55:30 *** Prof_Frink [~proffrink@5e0b8955.bb.sky.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 07:57:30 *** andythenorth_ [~andy@host217-43-130-207.range217-43.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Quit: andythenorth_] 07:58:54 *** ar3k [~ident@87-239-75-101.internetia.net.pl] has quit [Read error: Connection timed out] 08:01:10 *** ar3k [~ident@87-239-75-101.internetia.net.pl] has joined #openttd 08:01:43 <dihedral> time for church :-) 08:02:38 *** andythenorth_ [~andy@host217-43-130-207.range217-43.btcentralplus.com] has joined #openttd 08:02:47 *** roboboy [~robotboy@CPE-58-173-41-16.nxzp1.ken.bigpond.net.au] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 08:04:09 *** Keiya [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has joined #openttd 08:05:09 <andythenorth_> Terkhen: what did you decide about partial refits? 08:05:26 *** Progman [~progman@p57A1BF66.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #openttd 08:06:13 *** roboboy [~robotboy@CPE-58-173-41-16.nxzp1.ken.bigpond.net.au] has joined #openttd 08:11:46 *** Keiya_ [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 08:22:14 *** |Jeroen| [~jeroen@d5152B6A8.access.telenet.be] has joined #openttd 08:36:45 *** Keiya [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 08:37:34 *** sunnydrake [~sunnydrak@prefering.wraps.volia.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 08:43:27 <Terkhen> andythenorth_: the biggest problem is partial refit orders 08:43:30 *** roboboy [~robotboy@CPE-58-173-41-16.nxzp1.ken.bigpond.net.au] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 08:43:50 <andythenorth_> I can see that would be hard 08:44:43 <Terkhen> I'm not sure if I should just ignore them, but given the amount of problems they raise IMO it's probably the best option 08:45:13 <Terkhen> besides that it is mostly a GUI problem only, as the existing refit command could be converted to work with partial refits 08:46:02 *** Cybertinus [~Cybertinu@tunnel3304.ipv6.xs4all.nl] has joined #openttd 08:47:27 *** fani0z [~fanioz@180.214.233.20] has joined #openttd 08:49:31 <Terkhen> about the GUI; my idea was to allow selecting the part of the train you want to refit at the depot window 08:49:46 <Terkhen> then a refit window for only that part would be opened 08:50:08 <andythenorth_> did you figure out how to do the selection yet? 08:50:40 <andythenorth_> I suppose ctrl-dragging to a refit button is a bad interaction? 08:51:09 *** fanioz [~fanioz@180.214.233.20] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 08:51:51 <Terkhen> since most click combinations are already in use, I'd go with a refit button that would switch the behaviour to "select part to be refitted" 08:52:36 <Terkhen> but I still have not checked the depot GUI code to see if this is feasible 08:53:13 <andythenorth_> it's quite a change - moves the refit to be on the depot, not the vehicle? 08:53:36 *** X-2 [~X-2@5ED67292.cm-7-7b.dynamic.ziggo.nl] has joined #openttd 08:54:09 <Terkhen> the refit button in the vehicle would maintain its behaviour: clicking on it would show the refit window for the complete vehicle 08:55:16 <Terkhen> the ideal solution would be showing the consist at the refit window and allowing to select parts there 08:55:34 <Terkhen> the vehicle drawing code is already splitted, but the selection code is not 08:56:47 <andythenorth_> consist makes more sense 08:56:54 *** Pulec [~pulec@static-cl093181068250.unet.cz] has joined #openttd 08:57:00 <andythenorth_> if this gets extended to planes (two slots) then the depot view won't make any sense 08:57:08 <andythenorth_> it would be better to have a good generic solution 08:57:23 <andythenorth_> (and not have two different refit buttons - confusing!) 08:57:23 <Terkhen> hmmm... you are right 08:57:45 <Terkhen> then the best option is allowing to select parts at the refit window 08:57:51 <andythenorth_> I think it's quite a big ask to make this good 08:57:58 <andythenorth_> it would help to know how consists might work 08:58:46 <Terkhen> IMO this is independent of consists: now it would work with single vehicles, and when/if consists are done it could be tweaked to work with them 09:01:10 *** roboboy [~robotboy@CPE-58-173-41-16.nxzp1.ken.bigpond.net.au] has joined #openttd 09:02:16 * andythenorth_ puzzles about interaction of shared orders (with refit) and consists 09:02:38 <andythenorth_> seems like solution would be 'goto depot A and refit to consist xyz' 09:02:46 <andythenorth_> then 'goto depot B and refit to consist pdq' 09:02:58 <andythenorth_> Terkhen: ^ that would simplify your life 09:03:07 <andythenorth_> only consists have to deal with partial refits in that case 09:03:23 <andythenorth_> shared orders don't care about what's inside the consist, just the consist ID 09:04:24 *** Keyboard_Warrior [~holyduck@77.106.152.200] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 09:06:03 <Terkhen> what if some of the vehicles sharing orders can't refit to that consist? 09:07:03 <andythenorth_> dunno 09:07:29 <andythenorth_> it's a consist - they replace vehicles ;) 09:07:45 <andythenorth_> consist specifies vehicles & refit *per* vehicle 09:08:00 <andythenorth_> orders specifies which consist to use when refitting 09:08:08 <andythenorth_> seems clean to me :) 09:11:29 <andythenorth_> hmm 09:11:41 <andythenorth_> if we have rv-wagons, we have to teach the AI about them.... 09:11:45 <andythenorth_> much fun :D 09:13:29 <Terkhen> the consist idea alters many core parts of the game: vehicles, refits, groups, orders... I expect it to have a big can of worms hidden somewhere; that's why I think the first requirement for this are some specs describing what would it do and what would need to be changed 09:13:48 <andythenorth_> I am happy to try and write something 09:13:54 <andythenorth_> I know *nothing* about the internals :) 09:14:43 *** elho [elho@psycho.elho.net] has joined #openttd 09:14:47 <Terkhen> as long as the specs are consistent, IMO they should make appear any concept problems with the idea 09:14:48 <andythenorth_> Terkhen: wiki page? 09:14:50 <andythenorth_> forum thread? 09:15:45 <Terkhen> a wiki page is better, otherwise it will become a feature suggestion discussion thread, and IIRC there's already one for this 09:17:28 <andythenorth_> ok 09:17:35 <andythenorth_> let me finish refactoring HEQS and I'll try 09:19:00 * andythenorth_ is running out of IDs for articulated parts 09:19:29 <andythenorth_> there are only 40 09:19:32 <planetmaker> 80 09:19:41 <planetmaker> hm. Not when you keep default 09:19:45 <andythenorth_> exactly :P 09:19:51 <andythenorth_> I have to start at 58 09:19:53 <andythenorth_> 58h 09:20:09 <andythenorth_> I have a solution, but it's....much work :( 09:20:17 <planetmaker> @calc 0x80 - 0x58 09:20:17 <DorpsGek> planetmaker: 40 09:20:38 <andythenorth_> currently HEQS ID use is very inefficient, as there were problems with refit cb for RVs when I first wrote HEQS 09:20:49 <andythenorth_> so I just made lots of vehicles with different properties 09:20:54 <planetmaker> But... how many articulated things do you need? One per tram probably, one per lorry 09:21:02 <Terkhen> are you planning that many additional vehicles for HEQS? 09:21:14 *** frosch123 [~frosch@frnk-590f7232.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #openttd 09:21:14 <andythenorth_> trailers change capacity over time, so currently '1 trailer' might have 6 IDs 09:21:21 <andythenorth_> it's resolvable 09:21:22 *** elho [elho@psycho.elho.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:21:29 <andythenorth_> I just have to change quite a lot of code :( 09:21:44 *** elho [elho@psycho.elho.net] has joined #openttd 09:21:45 <frosch123> port to nml instead :p 09:22:12 <andythenorth_> bugger that 09:22:28 <andythenorth_> we'll try BANDIT in nml 09:22:34 <andythenorth_> I'm not porting any existing nfo 09:22:51 <andythenorth_> for a start, I'd have to work out what it actually *does* so I can port it :P 09:23:22 *** roboboy [~robotboy@CPE-58-173-41-16.nxzp1.ken.bigpond.net.au] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 09:25:16 <Yexo> good morning 09:25:30 <andythenorth_> hi Yexo 09:25:32 <andythenorth_> also qu 09:25:34 <andythenorth_> quak 09:39:12 <planetmaker> moin Yexo 09:43:08 *** roboboy [~robotboy@CPE-58-173-41-16.nxzp1.ken.bigpond.net.au] has joined #openttd 09:47:26 *** xiong [~xiong@netblock-68-183-253-25.dslextreme.com] has joined #openttd 09:47:46 *** dfox [~dfox@ip-89-176-209-74.net.upcbroadband.cz] has joined #openttd 09:50:13 *** KouDy [~KouDy@188.75.190.58] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 09:53:32 *** tokai [~tokai@port-92-195-201-48.dynamic.qsc.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 09:55:36 *** tokai [~tokai@port-92-195-89-186.dynamic.qsc.de] has joined #openttd 09:55:39 *** mode/#openttd [+v tokai] by ChanServ 09:57:37 <frosch123> andythenorth_: "I'm going to change many of the vehicle IDs in HEQS. This is so that HEQS doesn't replace the default game vehicles." <- what weird reasoning is that? :o 09:58:28 <frosch123> just tell them to load "original engines" grf or so 10:00:13 <planetmaker> :-) true Or OpenGFX+RV ;-) 10:06:12 *** roboboy [~robotboy@CPE-58-173-41-16.nxzp1.ken.bigpond.net.au] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 10:07:10 <andythenorth_> ach 10:07:16 <andythenorth_> then I have to do work to tell people 10:07:38 <andythenorth_> this way I just have to do some amount of code work to gain no new features :P 10:08:08 *** fani0z [~fanioz@180.214.233.20] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 10:10:12 <xiong> I don't like industries to disappear. But it takes quite some time to spread out over the whole map and provide good service to all. Is it better to provide no service or crappy service? By 'crappy', I'm thinking of truck stops that go 2 tiles and dump their cargo. What kinds of cheap service can I provide to keep industry from closing up? 10:10:35 <andythenorth_> try a better industry set :) 10:10:46 <andythenorth_> or do the truck thing you suggested 10:11:36 <xiong> Also, is there ever any point trying to save an industry whose closure is 'imminent'? Seems that by the time I get anything set up, no matter how quickly or sparse, the industry is gone -- the warning comes too late. Can I inspect an industry and get earlier warning? 10:11:37 <frosch123> or use alberth's industry patch 10:11:52 <andythenorth_> the warning is to late 10:12:00 <andythenorth_> there's no earlier warning in default industries 10:12:06 <andythenorth_> to / too /s 10:14:52 <xiong> Patch is interesting; I'm looking it over. I'm not sure if I feel right about moving the goalposts that way, though. 10:16:17 <xiong> Seems to me I can keep a primary industry content, at least, by dumping its cargo at a next-door station. Dunno. But I don't see if doing that will work for a secondary industry, which seems to claim lack of supply as the reason for closure. Yes? No? 10:16:43 <andythenorth_> yes 10:16:57 <andythenorth_> I'm not sure if the secondary code actually checks cargo delivered or cargo transported 10:17:08 <andythenorth_> but you can't get the latter without the former :) 10:18:57 *** pugi [~pugi@p4FCC4C0C.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #openttd 10:19:50 <xiong> Right. I see a statement in (http://wiki.openttd.org/Game_mechanics#Station_rating): "Note: If a vehicle was ready to pick up a cargo but there was no cargo, it is regarded as a cargo pickup anyhow" -- I don't know if this applies to keeping an industry from closing. I can easily imagine dummy trucks going in and out. 10:20:20 <xiong> My problem is that I don't see a way to test this simply. If I put such a gimmick near an industry and it doesn't close, this tells me nothing. 10:21:00 <andythenorth_> testing industry things is....somewhat time consuming and frustrating :) 10:21:01 <frosch123> if you stockpile too many stuff at a station, the rating will decrease faster than it raises due to the trucks 10:21:23 <xiong> I imagine using a cheat to give me extra cash, then going around and doing this sort of thing all over a test map, then running for 100 years with breakdowns off. 10:21:35 <xiong> ... seeing what survives and what doesn't. 10:22:08 <andythenorth_> xiong: or use FIRS :) 10:22:11 <andythenorth_> and disable closures 10:22:13 <xiong> frosch123, I got a hint of that in one case. 10:22:14 <andythenorth_> or ECS same 10:22:34 <andythenorth_> or there is a 'no close' grf somewhere I think for default industries 10:22:47 <Yexo> manual industries :p 10:23:50 <xiong> I probably should not think so hard about how to fix this; I dunno. The truck gimmick, even if it works, is not exactly square. I'm having a goal issue here. 10:24:47 <andythenorth_> xiong: you'll find you easily get enough money that you can build your own industries 10:24:54 <andythenorth_> depends on what your goal is 10:24:56 <xiong> I have a secondary bus station in every town I work, with local service, which seriously improves station rating and town growth. I can justify this under the heading of, yes, local service -- although with two stations right across the road from each other, it's a bit funky. 10:25:08 <andythenorth_> are you trying to win according to original 'win conditions' from default game? 10:25:10 <xiong> andythenorth_, That's the problem. What is my goal? 10:25:21 <andythenorth_> first win the game according to original win conditions 10:25:26 <andythenorth_> then you have to invent your own goals 10:25:30 <xiong> Ordinarily, I'm a very competitive player. 10:25:43 <andythenorth_> the best and worst things about openttd are 'no goals' 10:25:51 <xiong> I didn't know there was a particular win goal built in. 10:26:07 <planetmaker> even in TTD 10:26:15 <andythenorth_> find 'detailed performance rating' 10:26:31 <planetmaker> hardly anyone uses it. Seems many not even know it ;-) 10:26:36 <andythenorth_> I used to use it 10:26:40 <xiong> So, my current goal is just to build out -- build big and build over the map; try to build efficiently. I think efficiency is more important than gross size. 10:26:46 <planetmaker> so do I sometimes 10:26:49 <andythenorth_> I won in every climate with default, then I had to invent my own stuff 10:26:50 <planetmaker> Most often not, though 10:27:02 <andythenorth_> it's a meta-game for me now 10:27:14 <andythenorth_> the 'game' is making stuff for the game 10:27:34 <andythenorth_> which means playing the technical game of nfo, and the social game of collaborative coding 10:27:55 *** KenjiE20 [~KenjiE20@92.22.66.123] has joined #openttd 10:28:05 <andythenorth_> it's approximately similar to lego, but the collaboration opportunities are better :) 10:28:13 <andythenorth_> I think minecrack is having the same effect 10:28:38 <V453000> and which is also why openttd is so uniquely entertaining even for LOOOONG time :) because you basically challenge yourself and your ideas ... possibly improving them, for which there is like endless possibilities :) 10:29:04 <xiong> I guess I really am going to have to sit down and think about goals. My general approach to an open-ended game is to push against its limits. 10:29:14 <andythenorth_> xiong: you'll end up writing code :) 10:29:21 <andythenorth_> already you started on that route 10:29:30 <andythenorth_> the limits are the limits of the code, not the game 10:29:30 <xiong> andythenorth_, In a small way. 10:30:14 <xiong> I can't get too deeply into this; I have a large Perl project to complete. I have set a deadline of Easter Sunday for it. 10:30:33 <andythenorth_> :) 10:30:40 <andythenorth_> openttd will suck time 10:30:54 <andythenorth_> occasionally I used to delete it 10:31:01 <andythenorth_> but I always ended up reinstalling 10:31:25 <andythenorth_> hmm 10:31:33 <andythenorth_> HEQS articulated parts just fit into available IDs 10:31:39 <andythenorth_> 5 spare 10:31:40 * Rubidium would rather go for whit monday as deadline 10:31:49 <andythenorth_> deadlines are weird 10:31:58 <xiong> Perhaps I should just abandon attempts to save industry. It closes, it closes. 10:32:15 <V453000> prospect more if you need? 10:32:22 <Rubidium> just to annoy all the folks with their it's "with" not "whit" complaints 10:32:27 <xiong> andythenorth_, Self-imposed. Otherwise, I'll never finish it. 10:32:32 <andythenorth_> frustrating if you just constructed a route to an industry that closes 10:32:47 <V453000> then fund :p 10:32:50 *** lugo [~lugo@mgdb-4db8fac9.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #openttd 10:33:00 <andythenorth_> has anyone tried recent FIRS with closure *on*? 10:33:04 <andythenorth_> I have no idea if it works 10:33:56 * Rubidium wonders whether this is the right channel for that question. Most in here either don't really play OpenTTD anymore and just hang around, or they find joy in changing things about OpenTTD and thus not really play OpenTTD 10:34:14 <andythenorth_> I could try #tycoon, but... 10:34:17 <andythenorth_> it's a wrong place 10:35:01 * lugo did not try yet 10:35:02 *** roboboy [~robotboy@CPE-58-173-41-16.nxzp1.ken.bigpond.net.au] has joined #openttd 10:35:13 <lugo> but i'm definitly playing ;) 10:38:42 * Terkhen was going to play but things to do came up as usual 10:39:09 <planetmaker> lol @ Rubidium :-) 10:39:37 <planetmaker> lugo: can you prepare an update of the FIRS translation? 10:41:44 *** xiong [~xiong@netblock-68-183-253-25.dslextreme.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 10:45:54 *** HerzogDeXtEr [~Flex@89.246.163.220] has joined #openttd 10:47:27 *** Fuco [~dota.keys@fuco.sks3.muni.cz] has joined #openttd 11:06:02 *** davis [~b@p5B28A70F.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 11:08:23 *** davis [~b@p5B2895F8.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #openttd 11:09:30 <lugo> planetmaker, yup 11:09:39 <planetmaker> sweet :-) 11:10:13 <planetmaker> still I think that the farms need some more thought 11:10:23 <planetmaker> Using the burocratic words is no solution either 11:10:30 <planetmaker> and just looks ugly IMHO 11:10:38 <andythenorth_> I was wondering if 'mixed farm' is just farm 11:10:52 <andythenorth_> in the UK it makes complete sense, but seems problematic for just about everyone else 11:14:10 <planetmaker> Milchvieh-Betrieb or Bauernhof is quite accurate and used - despite what he claims 11:14:26 <planetmaker> Ackerbaubetrieb might be better worded 11:14:46 <planetmaker> and indeed just Bauernhof for the mixed farm 11:15:55 <lugo> Milchvieh-Betrieb is ok i guess 11:16:48 <andythenorth_> is there a way to make an RV *longer* 11:17:00 <andythenorth_> return signed byte to length cb? 11:17:06 <planetmaker> maybe "Schafzuchtbetrieb" - but that doesn't cover wool adequately IMHO 11:18:40 *** roboboy [~robotboy@CPE-58-173-41-16.nxzp1.ken.bigpond.net.au] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 11:18:48 <planetmaker> Bauernhof mit Schafhaltung? 11:19:09 *** jpx_ [jpx_@a91-156-251-33.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #openttd 11:20:24 <frosch123> andythenorth_: no, else you could bulldoze road/track between the trailers and crash ottd :) 11:20:38 <andythenorth_> ok thanks 11:27:13 <lugo> planetmaker, that's pretty hard, latter i think is correct but it looks and sounds weird ;) 11:27:37 *** xiong [~xiong@netblock-68-183-253-25.dslextreme.com] has joined #openttd 11:33:54 *** |Jeroen| [~jeroen@d5152B6A8.access.telenet.be] has quit [Quit: oO] 11:34:55 *** roboboy [~robotboy@CPE-58-173-41-16.nxzp1.ken.bigpond.net.au] has joined #openttd 11:35:19 *** avdg [~avdg@94-227-100-192.access.telenet.be] has joined #openttd 11:36:50 *** HerzogDeXtEr [~Flex@89.246.163.220] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 11:37:02 <lugo> planetmaker, so i'd replace mixed farm with Bauernhof but as for arable farm, 'Getreidefarm' seems pretty unusual too :/ 11:37:46 <planetmaker> lugo: Ackerbaubetrieb 11:38:47 *** Singaporekid [~notme@cm4.epsilon84.maxonline.com.sg] has joined #openttd 11:39:38 <lugo> planetmaker, what do you think about 'Schrott-Recycling-Hof' for 'Abfallhalde' 11:39:58 <planetmaker> uhm... not really :-) 11:40:00 <davis> Abfall isn't quite recycling now , is it 11:40:26 <davis> whats wrong with Schrottplatz though 11:40:46 <planetmaker> ^ good word 11:42:01 <davis> =) 11:45:38 <lugo> ok 'Schrottplatz' sounds less awkward than Schrott-Recycling-Hof which i think would be technically correct 11:45:58 <lugo> so it's good word indeed :D 11:46:35 <frosch123> if (year < 1995) return "Schrottplatz"; else return "Recyclinghof"; 11:46:51 <planetmaker> :-) 11:46:54 <planetmaker> feature request!° 11:47:26 <lugo> hehe 11:47:41 <frosch123> just like if (year < 1995) return "MÃŒlldeponie"; else return "Wertstoff-Sammelplatz"; 11:48:19 <planetmaker> that's the same industry :-P 11:48:47 <frosch123> hmm, isn't it also in the other case? 11:49:58 <planetmaker> yes... I think the waste collection point was removed. I might err, though 11:50:31 <planetmaker> that's why I assumed you meant the junk yard 11:56:14 <davis> if (year > 1999) return "Putzfrau"; else return "Reinigungsfachkraft"; 11:56:15 <davis> ;) 11:57:21 <lugo> Schafbauernhof seems to be a real word too 11:57:41 *** fonsinchen [~fonsinche@brln-4db80fec.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #openttd 11:57:47 <lugo> i mean one which is used fairly often 11:57:55 <davis> yep , seems legit 11:58:01 <davis> http://www.muehlen.at/wanderdorf/gewerbe/schafbauernhof-wernig/ 11:58:35 <planetmaker> then let's use that 11:59:23 *** X-2 [~X-2@5ED67292.cm-7-7b.dynamic.ziggo.nl] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:04:43 <lugo> i think holzverarbeitung and bauxitmine don't need change, since holzverabeitungsbetrieb and bauxitbergwerk are more or less synonymous 12:06:29 *** roboboy [~robotboy@CPE-58-173-41-16.nxzp1.ken.bigpond.net.au] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 12:10:56 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: frosch * r20957 /trunk/src/ (9 files in 2 dirs): -Codechange: Add another parameter to FindGRFConfig() to define search restrictions. 12:11:37 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: frosch * r20958 /trunk/src/ (newgrf_config.cpp newgrf_config.h): -Add: the concept of min-loadable-version to NewGRFs when choosing compatbile NewGRFs. (planetmaker) 12:12:06 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: frosch * r20959 /trunk/src/newgrf_config.h: -Codechange: Realign comments. 12:13:26 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: frosch * r20960 /trunk/src/ (lang/english.txt newgrf.cpp newgrf_config.cpp newgrf_gui.cpp): 12:13:26 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: -Add: Allow setting 'minimal compatible version' via Action14. (planetmaker) 12:13:26 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: Note: Setting 'VRSN' also sets 'MINV' resulting in the Grf being only compatible to the same version. Set 'MINV' after 'VRSN' if your Grf is compatible to older versions. 12:13:49 <planetmaker> \o/ :-) 12:14:05 <xiong> Is there any reason not to use 3x3 grid for "Road layout for new towns"? 12:14:15 <frosch123> yes, it is ugly 12:14:28 <planetmaker> ^ andythenorth_ your newgrfs need an update ;-) 12:14:35 <planetmaker> (mine, too) 12:14:52 <xiong> frosch123, Classical or romantic ugly? 12:15:39 <frosch123> anyway, i do not like towns :p 12:15:40 <planetmaker> oh, andythenorth_ no need to change the grfID anymore ;-) 12:16:03 <planetmaker> so you can undo your last HEQS grfid change :-P 12:16:08 <frosch123> planetmaker: wanna crash old versions of ottd? :p 12:16:10 <xiong> Okay, well, then, perhaps I'd better try again. Is there any technical reason why 3x3 grid streets are a poor choice? 12:16:18 <planetmaker> frosch123: yes :-P 12:16:22 <planetmaker> then people do update ;-) 12:16:52 <planetmaker> (or don't play at all anymore :S ) 12:17:14 <xiong> I imagine that early towns will not fill the center square, but that later, bigger buildings will fill them in. 12:17:31 <frosch123> "technical"? you mean workes need shorter schooling when they only have to build straight roads? 12:17:34 <planetmaker> there's one easy way to find out 12:17:40 <planetmaker> ^ @ xiong 12:18:48 <Rubidium> grids give me an American feeling and I don't fancy the USA that much anymore 12:19:25 <xiong> planetmaker, I have a certain way of looking at things, which may seem strange. It probably comes from a career as a hardware engineer. I got into the habit early on of trying to know what may happen before I actually do anything. Certainly, I experiment; but I ask for good advice on major issues. 12:21:00 <xiong> Rubidium, I understand that there may be all sorts of romantic objections (in the ZAAMM sense) to 3x3 grid. I'm asking about technical, classical objections of the form "towns won't grow properly" or that other bad, functional things happen. 12:21:44 <planetmaker> it's a feature. You can use it or skip it. It just changes how it looks like 12:21:53 <xiong> I'm pretty sure, on the face of it, that 2x2 grid towns will function properly. I'm also fairly certain that buildings want to build only adjacent to roads. I'm only guessing about later developments. 12:22:35 <xiong> Boy, I really do seem to have a hard time expressing myself clearly today. 12:22:59 <Rubidium> with 3x3 you can have less 2x2 buildings 12:23:25 *** Biolunar [mahdi@blfd-4db1a598.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #openttd 12:23:40 *** fonsinchen [~fonsinche@brln-4db80fec.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:23:42 <xiong> Functionally, 3x3 grids *might* be more efficient, since less of town area is consumed by roads. 3x3 should be more dense. 12:24:01 <xiong> It's not value-neutral. 12:24:52 <Eddi|zuHause> i hate grids 12:24:53 <xiong> Rubidium, Thank you; that is a pertinent statement. 12:30:27 *** KritiK [~Maxim@95-27-101-241.broadband.corbina.ru] has joined #openttd 12:35:17 *** fanioz [~fanioz@223.255.225.2] has joined #openttd 12:35:42 *** glx [glx@2a01:e35:2f59:c7c0:bc6e:b933:883d:faad] has joined #openttd 12:35:45 *** mode/#openttd [+v glx] by ChanServ 12:38:12 *** Alberth [~hat@a82-95-164-127.adsl.xs4all.nl] has joined #openttd 12:49:40 *** nicfer [~nicfer@190.50.33.196] has joined #openttd 12:51:23 <andythenorth_> with 3x3 does the middle tile get filled? 12:51:28 <andythenorth_> it's not near a road... 12:51:39 <andythenorth_> near / adjoining /s 12:52:00 <andythenorth_> planetmaker: why don't I need to change grfid :o 12:52:01 <andythenorth_> ? 12:53:01 <planetmaker> @commit 20958 12:53:01 <DorpsGek> planetmaker: Commit by frosch :: r20958 /trunk/src (newgrf_config.cpp newgrf_config.h) (2010-10-17 12:12:52 UTC) 12:53:02 <DorpsGek> planetmaker: -Add: the concept of min-loadable-version to NewGRFs when choosing compatbile NewGRFs. (planetmaker) 12:53:29 <planetmaker> @commit 20960 12:53:29 <DorpsGek> planetmaker: Commit by frosch :: r20960 /trunk/src (4 files in 2 dirs) (2010-10-17 12:14:49 UTC) 12:53:30 <DorpsGek> planetmaker: -Add: Allow setting 'minimal compatible version' via Action14. (planetmaker) 12:53:31 <DorpsGek> planetmaker: Note: Setting 'VRSN' also sets 'MINV' resulting in the Grf being only compatible to the same version. Set 'MINV' after 'VRSN' if your Grf is compatible to older versions. 12:54:27 <planetmaker> for the sake of current stable versions it might still be a good idea, though 12:55:33 <andythenorth_> hmm 12:55:42 <andythenorth_> I should add that to HEQS / FISH / FIRS? 12:56:03 <Alberth> andythenorth_: if you have larger buildings than 1x1, the middle tile can be used. 12:56:18 <planetmaker> andythenorth_: yes, you should 12:56:32 <andythenorth_> planetmaker: I should add it to HEQS before I release 0.8.0? 12:56:34 <planetmaker> it should be the version which can (still) be loaded 12:56:49 <planetmaker> and always be changed when it's not compatible anymore 12:57:09 <planetmaker> also between releases. As the version is changed with every commit 12:57:20 <planetmaker> it's the repository version 12:57:42 <andythenorth_> what do I need to do? 12:58:14 <planetmaker> add a new action14 line with MINV and the minimum revision which is compatible to the current one 12:58:32 <planetmaker> (which could be the one now, if you don't care to look :-) ) 12:59:05 <planetmaker> it subsequently only needs changing when you do incompatible stuff 12:59:08 <andythenorth_> hmm 12:59:13 <frosch123> but make sure to set MINV after VRSN 12:59:16 <andythenorth_> I have to learn to remember to do this 12:59:27 <andythenorth_> shipping this broken would be unhelpful :P 12:59:45 <planetmaker> yes, it needs to be remembered to be used 12:59:45 <frosch123> http://wiki.ttdpatch.net/tiki-index.php?page=Action14#_Minimal_compatible_GRF_version_quot_INFO_quot_gt_quot_MINV_quot_ <- i hope that is understandable :s 12:59:52 <planetmaker> But there's no way to do it automatically 13:00:16 * andythenorth_ has just eaten too much to figure this out right now :) 13:00:27 <andythenorth_> I want to ship HEQS 0.8.0 today 13:00:31 <andythenorth_> maybe I figure it out later 13:00:31 <frosch123> i failed to put it in short sentences :) 13:00:38 <andythenorth_> or maybe planetmaker adds it for me :D 13:00:59 <planetmaker> frosch123: that's probably as short as it gets :-) 13:01:22 <frosch123> "When loading a game which used an older version of your GRF which is no longer installed, the newest installed version of your GRF will be picked which is still compatible to the version used before." <- might be too long :) 13:01:38 <planetmaker> andythenorth_: just add the current revisions ;-) 13:01:47 <planetmaker> I don't know when you broke compatibility 13:01:49 <andythenorth_> I don't have action 14 in HEQS yet 13:01:55 <planetmaker> he 13:08:05 <andythenorth_> planetmaker: I broke compatibility at r407 13:09:36 <planetmaker> then 407 is what you put there 13:12:12 <andythenorth_> hmm 13:12:19 <andythenorth_> what action 14 stuff do I need to add :P 13:13:17 <planetmaker> version and minversion: VRSN, MINV 13:13:25 <andythenorth_> and palette? 13:13:48 <planetmaker> hm, yes, you should 13:14:13 <planetmaker> and parameters, if there are 13:14:33 <andythenorth_> fatal renum error :P 13:14:33 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: frosch * r20961 /trunk/src/tunnelbridge_cmd.cpp: -Cleanup: Remove redundant/duplicate invisibility test. (uni657) 13:15:01 *** ar3k [~ident@87-239-75-101.internetia.net.pl] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 13:15:05 <andythenorth_> planetmaker: http://pastebin.com/zBgiK90L 13:16:23 <andythenorth_> planetmaker: I need to change the nfo version ;) 13:16:58 <andythenorth_> compiles 13:17:03 <andythenorth_> no idea if it works :P 13:17:25 <planetmaker> looks good 13:17:45 <planetmaker> you'll see that when you use r20960 or later ;-) 13:17:53 <__ln__> http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v224/Bootaaay/minecraft.gif 13:19:00 * andythenorth_ thinks to release HEQS 0.8.0 13:19:55 *** Devroush [~dennis@94-225-67-91.access.telenet.be] has joined #openttd 13:20:08 <Rubidium> better let someone test it first, i.e. let the nightly run and wait a bit :) 13:20:33 <pugi> awesome, ln :D 13:20:37 <planetmaker> might be good :-) 13:21:14 <planetmaker> doesn't stop you preparing everything but the last tag, though, andythenorth_ ;-) 13:23:29 *** ar3k [~ident@87-239-75-101.internetia.net.pl] has joined #openttd 13:24:36 <andythenorth_> planetmaker: will you be sad if I post a grf in the forums :o 13:25:02 <planetmaker> I don't mind. The question is: why? 13:25:14 <andythenorth_> when does the nightly build run? 13:25:17 <planetmaker> IMHO you hurt yourself 13:25:34 <planetmaker> and there's always time till the next nightly, we're not in a racing competition 13:25:43 <planetmaker> 18:20 CE(S)T 13:25:48 <andythenorth_> it can wait 13:25:55 <andythenorth_> it's only a few hours :) 13:26:12 <planetmaker> as long as few >24, it's always a few 13:26:21 <planetmaker> that's the whole point of nightlies... 13:28:37 <planetmaker> the argument against posting is exactly this: a) you might add something else (which then will go untested) and worse: b) you'll continue to work on it - and if people use the nightly (or have a link) - they'll use your (nearly) newest. And not what you _now_ posted 13:28:56 <planetmaker> but... whatever suits you best :-) 13:30:11 *** Chillosophy [~fu@82-170-139-109.ip.telfort.nl] has joined #openttd 13:30:20 <andythenorth_> I'll wait :) 13:33:13 * andythenorth_ wonders 13:33:23 <andythenorth_> can I tag a release candidate, or is that overkill for a grf? 13:33:38 <Eddi|zuHause> anybody experience with steam? is it normal that simple connection takes ages? 13:34:25 <planetmaker> depends, andythenorth_ 13:34:35 <planetmaker> but as long as you don't use branches it's overkill 13:35:20 <andythenorth_> ok 13:35:36 <andythenorth_> I guess I have to remember to release sometime next week :) 13:35:38 <planetmaker> I pondered long about that for OpenGFX 13:35:48 <planetmaker> no point. I can just release a.b.(c+1) 13:37:07 <planetmaker> http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?p=908576#p908576 <-- I like that answer, Alberth :-) 13:38:19 <frosch123> :) 13:40:02 <andythenorth_> yeah, but batteries don't affect town growth :P 13:40:10 <SmatZ> :D 13:40:30 <planetmaker> andythenorth_: just a matter of newgrfs... 13:40:42 <andythenorth_> no 13:40:50 <andythenorth_> just a matter of TownControl 13:41:09 <planetmaker> introduce batteries in tropic and change the towneffect cargo 13:41:19 <xiong> (1) Best site for FIRS user docs? (2) Suggestions on choosing airplane set? 13:41:34 <Alberth> it never hurts to promote the toyland climate :) 13:41:36 <planetmaker> they could be dug out in a battery pit 13:41:36 <andythenorth_> http://tt-foundry.com/sets/FIRS/schema/economies 13:41:48 <andythenorth_> xion also the FIRS readme... 13:41:57 <xiong> I'm at the latter now. 13:42:08 <Alberth> planetmaker: nah, a 'ligtning catcher' would be more useful 13:42:13 <andythenorth_> http://bundles.openttdcoop.org/firs/releases/LATEST/ 13:42:23 <planetmaker> that sounds awesome, Alberth :-) 13:42:29 <andythenorth_> airplanes: I use AV8 and general AV8ion 13:42:54 <planetmaker> it gives a new idea for the toyland battery farm graphics... 13:43:20 <Alberth> I was thinking that too, better than the current 'farm-ish' approach :) 13:43:28 <planetmaker> MUCH! 13:43:35 <planetmaker> I'll ask Zephyris :-) 13:43:45 <andythenorth_> two cargos: 'empty batteries' and 'full batteries' :P 13:44:15 <Alberth> glass tubes with optional sparks flying around in it :) 13:44:23 * andythenorth_ ponders refactoring FISH next 13:44:35 <xiong> Hm. Good link, andythenorth_++ 13:44:50 <andythenorth_> np 13:44:52 <planetmaker> Default I cannot animate that much 13:45:05 <planetmaker> or not at all. But... in OpenGFX+ Industries :-P 13:45:08 <xiong> The two aviation sets aren't mutually exclusive? Is that general for vehicles? 13:45:33 <andythenorth_> those two are designed by Pikka to work together 13:45:36 <andythenorth_> one is an addon for the other 13:45:49 <andythenorth_> some sets work well with others; some don't 13:46:53 <xiong> I see this huge eGRVTS download but I fear it means all existing vehicles will have to go. I rather like the North American Renewal Set, for perhaps obvious reasons. 13:47:12 <andythenorth_> eGRVTS is road vehicles and trams only 13:47:26 <andythenorth_> you can combine sets with different vehicle types quite freely 13:47:50 <andythenorth_> only trains really have problems, and that only because of decisions by some newgrf authors 13:48:15 <andythenorth_> but not all vehicle sets have cargo support for all industry sets 13:48:22 <xiong> I cannot read the small type very well. 'trains' and 'trams' look almost alike. 13:48:53 <xiong> Right now, I'm at the point in the FIRS readme that tells about what vehicle sets are compatible. 13:49:01 <andythenorth_> try eGRVTS, NARS 2, HEQS, AV8, General AV8ion, and FISH 13:49:51 <andythenorth_> with US Road Set (but turn off the trams in that set), and Canadian Stations 13:49:58 <xiong> Yes, that was the direction I was headed. Thank you very much; it's good to know I'm not insane. 13:50:10 <andythenorth_> also expensive, short and slow bridges is useful 13:50:16 <andythenorth_> it's a grf by Pikka 13:50:49 <xiong> I cannot imagine why it would be good to have bridges cost more or impede traffic. Unless I found myself building them wantonly. 13:50:59 <andythenorth_> more challenging :) 13:51:24 <andythenorth_> other trainsets I like personally are: 2CC set and UKRS 1 or UKRS 2 13:51:41 <andythenorth_> Canadian Set and US Set are good, but don't fully support FIRS / ECS cargos 13:52:35 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: frosch * r20962 /trunk/src/ (gui.h toolbar_gui.cpp viewport_gui.cpp): -Fix [FS#4166](r20956): Determine tile under cursor before opening the new viewport. It might appear just below the cursor. 13:53:25 <xiong> Should I be starting gameplay in 1800 or 1850? By default, OpenTTD starts in 1950, so I thought that was 'correct'. 13:53:47 <xiong> ... but I see vehicles and buildings designed for earlier times. 13:53:58 <frosch123> starting in 1800 is quite hard 13:54:10 <andythenorth_> 1800 sucks a btit 13:54:10 *** avdg [~avdg@94-227-100-192.access.telenet.be] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 13:54:11 <andythenorth_> bit 13:54:18 *** snorre [~snorre@c692BBF51.dhcp.bluecom.no] has joined #openttd 13:54:23 <andythenorth_> I started my last game around 1850 13:54:40 <andythenorth_> and will play until about 2020 before I get bored 13:54:50 * andythenorth_ goes out for a bit 13:54:56 *** avdg [~avdg@94-227-100-192.access.telenet.be] has joined #openttd 13:55:00 <andythenorth_> sunshine in the UK in October 13:55:08 *** andythenorth_ [~andy@host217-43-130-207.range217-43.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Quit: andythenorth_] 13:55:23 <xiong> According to readme, NARS 2 supports FIRS. I have checked it out and it looks good for it -- many cars, many possible refits. 13:56:16 <xiong> I am a little concerned that refitting seems to be on a train-by-train basis. This means no hetrogenous trains? Or I have to shuffle cars around in the depot while refitting? 13:56:16 *** avdg [~avdg@94-227-100-192.access.telenet.be] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 13:56:32 *** avdg [~avdg@94-227-100-192.access.telenet.be] has joined #openttd 13:56:41 <Eddi|zuHause> yes 13:57:16 <xiong> I will start over in 1850. I have no problem with early times, in general. Disconcerting to start with diesels on the board already. 13:57:31 <lugo> xiong, yep don't forget sailing ships then ;) 13:57:33 <xiong> Thank you, Eddi|zuHause. 13:57:50 <xiong> I will just start over. 14:02:23 <xiong> Hm. As experiment, I enabled all these enhancements while running a game. It did not crash. But, strangely, even though it is 1950, horse-drawn carriages and freight vans are available. 14:04:20 <planetmaker> quite realistc 14:09:02 <xiong> Realistic, perhaps. Inconvenient, though. I have not been able to find any way of removing vehicles from the 'available' list. 14:09:19 <planetmaker> there's none 14:09:26 <V453000> "vehicles never expire" ? 14:09:29 <planetmaker> they'll be removed when they're not available anymore 14:09:33 <xiong> It doesn't help that the oldest ones are at the top -- when generally, one wants to build the newest or so. 14:09:40 <planetmaker> which will never happen with 'vehicles never expire' 14:09:50 <planetmaker> xiong: you can sort it 14:09:51 <V453000> although that is quite a gamebreaking and imo tarded option to have off :) 14:10:05 <planetmaker> ^ I agree :-) 14:10:22 <V453000> and as pm says :) you can sort them by introduction date, or anything you like, either way A-Z or Z-A 14:10:46 <planetmaker> you can also filter by cargo 14:10:46 <xiong> I had turned 'vehicles never expire' on, after reading some page that suggested it. I was concerned about getting a good-running city up and having all my vehicles expire in 2050. 14:11:09 <planetmaker> that could happen, though not with newgrf. 14:11:28 <planetmaker> Still, as passage of time is somewhat arbitrary I don't like it. But that's my personal opinion. 14:11:41 <V453000> btw 2050 is the same date as any other :) you still play :) (provided you still didnt get bored :) ) 14:11:57 <V453000> ... and provided you have vehicles never expiring :D 14:12:45 <xiong> Well. If I start in 1850, I think that eliminates that issue. I suppose I can always switch 'vehicles never expire' on again in, say, 2020. 14:12:59 <V453000> yes 14:13:17 <V453000> dont forget to "reset_engines" or what is that command, to get even the old vehicles back 14:13:28 <xiong> I see that FIRS freight trains require a caboose. Does that hold right up to game end? Or at some point is an EOT device assumed? 14:13:34 <V453000> NARS 14:13:38 <V453000> firs is industries nto trains 14:13:50 <V453000> and you can remove these later 14:13:52 <xiong> NARS. 14:14:34 <xiong> Mind you, I have never liked EOT and I'm a rabid caboose supporter. But I had to ask. 14:15:23 <xiong> I *highly* approve of NARS, all over. It has flatcars and I'm very much a flatcar man. I consider that a flatcar is a real test of a modeler's ability -- if he is brave enough not to put a load on it. 14:15:53 *** Lakie [~Lakie@91.84.251.149] has joined #openttd 14:16:04 <xiong> A poorly-done flat, with no load, is obviously a toy. Any flat with a cute load on it is... the easy way out. I never models loaded flats. 14:17:25 <V453000> imo NARS looks nice, but works terribly, it just has a shitload of engines of all the same kind, not much variety :/ 14:17:33 <xiong> Similar level of difficulty with a fairly new train of tank cars. Tanks are often in captive service, they rarely mix with other cars (due to safety issues), and so are often found all together, all the same. 14:17:57 * planetmaker wonders whether NARS has a switch to disable the speciality of the caboose 14:18:36 *** lolman [~lolman@188-220-249-104.zone11.bethere.co.uk] has joined #openttd 14:18:37 <V453000> pm: not with parameters 14:18:43 <xiong> The challenge is to keep, oh, 12 tanks realistically the same, yet different enough to be individual cars. You have to admit a slight ding in a railing here, a very small streak of rust there. If the tanks are new, you can't justify much of that. 14:18:54 <planetmaker> V453000: I feared as much 14:18:59 <V453000> it has some interesting parameter settings but not sadly no cabooses :| 14:19:25 <planetmaker> maybe you can propose that to Pikka? :-) 14:19:36 <V453000> for example parameter which allows for compatibility to be mixed with some other train sets in one game is quite interesting 14:19:44 <xiong> An extremely interesting article in one of the rail mags I read awhile back talked about some strange caboose-flats. They had been built in all sorts of nonstandard ways to serve as work vehicles. 14:19:47 <planetmaker> Then it's not always me who argues "I want simple settings" ;-) 14:19:55 <V453000> :) 14:20:30 <planetmaker> personally I'd skip the parameter for allowing to be used with other trainsets and just allow it. But well 14:20:45 <V453000> me too 14:20:48 <planetmaker> it works, so it's fine 14:20:52 <V453000> indeed 14:20:56 <xiong> One especially weird car had been built onto a 40-foot flat, with a caboose-like bunk/office structure at one end and a small crane at the other. 14:21:55 <xiong> I wonder if there's an OpenTTD use for unusual cars, like depressed flats. 14:23:23 <Rubidium> OpenTTD couldn't care less on how the cars/wagon/plane/ships look 14:23:32 <V453000> exactly :) 14:23:42 <xiong> Then there are the log cars that aren't really cars so much as loose trucks with some sort of bracketing. You strap about 3 big logs together at each end. 14:23:49 <Rubidium> it's totally obnoxiously unaware of the aesthetics of anything 14:24:11 <xiong> Obviously, you can't rail the empties back; you load them on a flat. 14:24:32 <V453000> ... 14:24:32 *** avdg [~avdg@94-227-100-192.access.telenet.be] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 14:24:44 <V453000> this is a game dude 14:24:57 <xiong> Well, for something like a depressed flat you need special loads, like generators and transformers. 14:25:28 <xiong> A crane car goes in a work train and heads out to derailments. 14:25:38 <planetmaker> hm, how do I remove an alias from the environment variables? 14:25:38 *** avdg [~avdg@94-227-100-192.access.telenet.be] has joined #openttd 14:25:59 <Rubidium> unalias? 14:26:30 <planetmaker> indeed. Thank you 14:26:48 <Rubidium> oh, it actually exists? 14:26:52 <planetmaker> yes 14:26:52 <xiong> Can company livery schemes be saved? I seem always to start with everything blue. 14:41:33 *** Zuu [~Zuu@2.66.7.161] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 14:45:17 *** Progman [~progman@p57A1BF66.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 14:50:58 *** dfox [~dfox@ip-89-176-209-74.net.upcbroadband.cz] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 14:54:20 *** llugo [~lugo@mgdb-4db8fac9.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #openttd 14:54:33 *** lugo [~lugo@mgdb-4db8fac9.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 14:57:55 *** Eddi|zuHause [~johekr@p54B76E28.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 14:59:21 *** Eddi|zuHause [~johekr@p54B76E28.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #openttd 15:05:38 *** Zuu [~Zuu@2.70.21.125] has joined #openttd 15:11:46 <ccfreak2k> Last I checked, it's random, but both base and stripe are the same. 15:16:31 *** fonsinchen [~fonsinche@brln-4db80fec.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #openttd 15:21:22 *** b_jonas [~x@BC24ED22.dsl.pool.telekom.hu] has joined #openttd 15:21:51 <b_jonas> oil rigs have two extra squares that just look like water but are actually part of the oil rig and can't be raised? 15:22:19 *** Devroush [~dennis@94-225-67-91.access.telenet.be] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 15:23:56 *** Brianetta [~brian@188-220-91-30.zone11.bethere.co.uk] has joined #openttd 15:27:08 *** fonsinchen [~fonsinche@brln-4db80fec.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 15:30:47 <Eddi|zuHause> afair oil rigs are 2x3 15:30:59 <b_jonas> is that so even in ttd? 15:31:14 <b_jonas> they're 2x3 in this game 15:31:22 <b_jonas> hmm, let me check that 15:31:24 <Eddi|zuHause> oil rigs haven't changed since TTO 15:32:34 <b_jonas> yes, you're right, they're 2x3 in ttd too 15:32:43 <b_jonas> they have those two invisible squares 15:32:59 <b_jonas> wow... how could I ever play on such a small screen? 15:35:56 <b_jonas> I'm used to ottd now apparently 15:36:33 *** andythenorth_ [~andy@host217-43-130-207.range217-43.btcentralplus.com] has joined #openttd 15:43:10 <Eddi|zuHause> hm, apparently they used debian's random number generator in the israelian lottery :p 15:43:52 <b_jonas> Eddi|zuHause: link? 15:44:08 <b_jonas> they used a rng that's not intended to be cryptographically secure? 15:44:48 <b_jonas> or one that was intended to be secure but isn't? 15:45:13 <Eddi|zuHause> http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/0,1518,723587,00.html 15:45:27 <Eddi|zuHause> they drew the same numbers as last month 15:47:12 <b_jonas> nah, that's not notable 15:47:59 <Eddi|zuHause> compare http://xkcd.com/221/ and http://www.dilbert.com/2001-10-25/ :) 15:50:37 <TrueBrain> so betting on the numbers of last month does result in win ... kewl 15:50:55 <TrueBrain> what are the odds of that happening again! 15:51:09 <TrueBrain> (hint: identical to any other combination of numbers) 15:51:30 *** nicfer [~nicfer@190.50.33.196] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 16:02:58 *** Wolf01 [~wolf01@host253-232-dynamic.9-87-r.retail.telecomitalia.it] has joined #openttd 16:03:01 <andythenorth_> Terkhen / anyone - is there already a wiki page for reworking consists/groups/shared orders/refits ? 16:04:00 <Wolf01> 'evening 16:06:35 *** kenneth [kenneth@cpc1-nrte13-0-0-cust531.8-4.cable.virginmedia.com] has joined #openttd 16:06:36 <kenneth> hello all 16:06:47 <Zuu> Hello kenneth 16:06:55 <Hirundo> Do all grfs get reloaded when the game mode (menu, game, editor) changes? 16:07:01 <kenneth> Im new to running my own dedicated servers guys 16:07:04 <kenneth> and was looking into patching 16:07:11 <kenneth> but am running into all sorts of issues with revisions 16:07:16 <Terkhen> andythenorth_: not that I know of 16:07:24 <Zuu> Do you know how to compile a clean trunk/stable? 16:07:33 <kenneth> is there an area where patches are avaliable for the stable version 16:07:44 <kenneth> i can compile, i just cant find the patches i would like for the stable version 16:07:51 <kenneth> or is there its a case of get yours hands dirty 16:07:58 <Rubidium> patches + stable version -> not so stable version (in 99% of the times) 16:08:19 <Rubidium> not so stable as in incompatible, i.e. desync generating 16:08:21 <kenneth> what I mean is, if i compile a trunk, can clients with the stable version still connect 16:08:38 <kenneth> will a vanilla client with stable release connect and talk to a patched trunk server 16:08:43 <Zuu> There is no website or page that contains patches that target the source code of the stable versions. 16:08:55 <Yexo> kenneth: no, it won't 16:09:01 <kenneth> ok 16:09:08 <Yexo> but a vanilla client won't talk to a patched stable server either 16:09:15 <Yexo> at least for 99% of the patches 16:09:29 <kenneth> so when I connect to other peoples servers and it tells me I cant play until i set a password etc and it actually locks the controls and i have connected from stable client 16:09:34 <kenneth> how has this been acheived ? 16:09:45 <kenneth> scripting? patching? 16:10:05 <Zuu> Most patches are against the current development version. Patches are a way of publishing on going work on new features/fixes etc for OpenTTD. The final goal for patches is often to reach the trunk. 16:10:13 <Yexo> most likely that is done by making you a spectator 16:10:26 <Yexo> as spectator all controls are indeed locked 16:10:34 <Rubidium> but if you're a spectator you can't change the password of your company 16:10:41 <Yexo> the server does have a patch in that case 16:10:44 <Yexo> hmm, true that 16:11:08 <Rubidium> but it can't tell your client to lock you out. It just messes with the commands you send the server 16:11:16 <Yexo> kenneth: do you have an example server where the controls are locked when you join? 16:11:25 <Zuu> If you know what you are doing it is possible to run a modified "stable" server that works with vanilia clients. However, the key is that you know what you are doing. 16:12:03 <kenneth> all of the luukland servers 16:12:08 * andythenorth_ wonders how to add a page to wiki 16:12:23 <Zuu> Maybe they do it so you have to send the password to the server via chat. 16:12:24 <kenneth> and they have a game called city builder 16:12:45 <Zuu> The server then set the password on your company and move you onto the company. 16:13:25 <kenneth> i just joined the server, created my own company, havent set a password or anything 16:13:49 <kenneth> when i click to build a road, it doesnt do anything, the toolbar isnt greyed out, i just get a chat message from the server says Company locked until password .... 16:13:52 <Zuu> andythenorth_: Type the URL for it (as you want to have it), and it will show up as missing with an option to add it. 16:13:59 <andythenorth_> :) 16:14:36 <Zuu> When you search for pages that don't exist it also may give you the option to add it. 16:15:06 <andythenorth_> Terkhen: http://wiki.openttd.org/Requested_features/Reworked_groups 16:15:14 <andythenorth_> I guess we need to add stuff there 16:23:41 <b_jonas> this is like the tenth news I'm getting about the same blue transport company being in trouble 16:31:46 *** theholyduck [~holyduck@ti112220a080-0782.bb.online.no] has joined #openttd 16:33:27 <Terkhen> andythenorth_: I'd start with what we want it to achieve 16:33:43 <Terkhen> easier autoreplace? more powerful group management? 16:36:41 *** jpx [jpx_@a91-156-251-33.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #openttd 16:38:06 *** Devroush [~dennis@ip-83-134-178-27.dsl.scarlet.be] has joined #openttd 16:41:16 <xiong> Hm. I have an 1850 town with a pop over 2K yet it accepts no mail. My station coverage includes nearly every building. Is this natural? Should I run mail wagons anyway? 16:41:34 *** jpx_ [jpx_@a91-156-251-33.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 16:42:10 *** jpx_ [jpx_@a91-156-251-33.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #openttd 16:44:43 *** jpx [jpx_@a91-156-251-33.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 16:47:20 <kenneth> does anyone know much about autopilot 16:47:22 *** Prof_Frink [~proffrink@5e0b8955.bb.sky.com] has joined #openttd 16:48:51 *** Alberth1 [~hat@a82-95-164-127.adsl.xs4all.nl] has joined #openttd 16:48:51 *** Alberth is now known as Guest3085 16:48:51 *** Alberth1 is now known as Alberth 16:52:20 <Yexo> kenneth: yes, someone does 16:52:32 <Yexo> see also the second-last part of the channel topic 16:52:40 <Eddi|zuHause> <Hirundo> Do all grfs get reloaded when the game mode (menu, game, editor) changes? <- i believe the answer is "yes" 16:52:48 *** Guest3085 [~hat@a82-95-164-127.adsl.xs4all.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 16:54:46 <andythenorth_> Terkhen: so what are the goals? 16:55:15 <andythenorth_> I haven't seen the forum thread(s?) about this topic :) 16:55:28 <andythenorth_> I looked, but couldn't find any 16:56:18 <Terkhen> andythenorth_: I don't know, I have never used groups 16:56:28 <andythenorth_> the blind leading the blind :) 16:56:33 <Terkhen> mostly because I have to create them manually 16:56:56 <Hirundo> "The definition of variable 1B is slightly feature-dependent. For features that can be drawn transparently (stations, bridges, houses, industry tiles and objects) bit 4 is set if the current feature will be drawn normally, and clear if the current feature will be drawn transparently." <- does this work in openttd? 16:56:56 <Terkhen> so, for me I'd say... groups automatically created for vehicles sharing orders 16:57:12 <andythenorth_> http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=50374 16:57:16 <andythenorth_> http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?p=728175#p728175 16:57:43 <Hirundo> I'd define it the other way around, shared orders are accomplished by moving a vehicle into a group and defining orders for that group 16:58:22 <Alberth> I'd do 'the same orders', whether shared or not 16:58:55 <Alberth> but I think a users should be able to group in pretty much any way he/she likes 17:00:12 <Alberth> what to do group-based is more difficult, I found summed profits, use of capacity, round-trip times perhaps, auto-renew/replace 17:00:17 <b_jonas> if groups are "labels", that is, a vehicle can be in multiple labels at once, than those are not exclusice 17:00:39 <Terkhen> vehicles grouped by a certain condition (shared orders, consist used, vehicle colours), groups that include groups... 17:00:45 <xiong> Terkhen, I'm with you. I'd like as many details to be handled by default as possible. Given a vehicle with orders, I would like to select it, create a group that includes only it (named, by default, via a sensible derivative of its order list and cargo type) and thereafter, be able to add more vehicles with the same shared orders from the group list, without reference to where any of the vehicles in the group may be. 17:01:32 <Hirundo> I'm completely with Brianetta, actually 17:01:41 <b_jonas> (and I'd like an easier way to add a vehicle to a group. dragging a large vehicle-shaped icon to a narrow bar in a list is not so good.) 17:01:44 <Yexo> Hirundo: no, bit 4 of var 1B is never set by openttd 17:01:49 <xiong> I realize that there are other reasons to group. Last game, I put all 'local service' road vehicles into one group to get them out of the way. 17:01:51 <Alberth> the goal is I think sort of what you can do with a single vehicle, but to make it scaling to more vehicles 17:01:54 <Yexo> at least I couldn't find any code that sets it 17:03:41 <Alberth> Hirundo: it focusses too much on orders I think, eg order by type of cargo would be valid too 17:04:06 <V453000> yeey, group liveries could be nice :) 17:04:40 <Hirundo> That's up to the user 17:04:48 <xiong> There is an option under 'Manage list' to 'Add shared vehicles', which is the right direction; but it's kinda obscure. 17:04:51 <Terkhen> maybe you should be able to easily define groups with vehicles sharing a set of properties, for example, "vehicles sharing a certain set of orders" 17:04:54 <planetmaker> I'd use groups to a) assign individual liveries b) assign individual replacement rules c) assign individual orders 17:05:17 <Rubidium> Alberth: to what extent can we "hide" groups? You could say that every OrderList is a group, and that some groups are not necessarily shown in the group list 17:05:22 <xiong> The thing is, grouping implies hierarchy and the whole idea of rigid hierarchies has pretty much been exploded. 17:05:32 <andythenorth_> to me 'shared orders' is already a form of group 17:05:38 <andythenorth_> do we have to expose 'groups' to players 17:05:39 <andythenorth_> ? 17:05:44 <Hirundo> In my case, I'd define one group to hold all my wood trains and a subgroup for each set of orders. Proper per-group replacement and statistics would be very nice 17:05:56 <andythenorth_> or do we expose other ways to manipulate groups in useful and interestingways? 17:06:06 <Brianetta> Hirundo: miss-tab? 17:06:13 <andythenorth_> are groups tags? 17:06:17 <Eddi|zuHause> # there's a cat in the bucket 17:06:23 <xiong> Usta be, I would reach for nested groups. But what's really wanted is vehicle tagging, so I can easily construct a group based on any number of things, with some tags being inherent in the vehicle or its orders. 17:06:37 <Alberth> Rubidium: perhaps we can hide groups, I was more thinking in terms of unfolding, like in the adv settings menu 17:06:58 <Eddi|zuHause> Brianetta: i'm sure we're discussing an old suggestion by you 17:07:01 <Alberth> andythenorth_: being able to put a vehicle in more than one group seems nice 17:07:25 <Alberth> Brianetta: http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?p=728175#p728175 17:07:28 <andythenorth_> how does this relate to consists? 17:07:38 <andythenorth_> I think consists have nothing to do with groups in relational terms 17:07:55 <xiong> I've confronted the same issue with my file system. At first, nested folders (directories if you enjoy typing) seem to be rational. But there are too many items that "belong" to more than one group, so I've started to itch for tagged files. 17:08:16 <andythenorth_> groups are associations between/across vehicles 17:08:27 <andythenorth_> based on data / metadata? 17:09:02 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: a "group" in this context would be an internal method to assign several vehicles to one general property 17:09:24 <andythenorth_> and what affordances does a group provide to the player? 17:09:25 <Alberth> we really need a glossary at the wiki :s 17:09:30 <xiong> Nested folders are fine in most cases but the very existence of symlinks shows they have a limitation. When I create a Perl module's test suite, I quickly find I have dozens of test scripts, each of which naturally "belongs" in several overlapping groups. I wish to tag these files, not sort them. 17:09:52 <andythenorth_> I started a wiki page for this: http://wiki.openttd.org/Requested_features/Reworked_groups 17:10:01 <andythenorth_> 'started' being a literal comment :P 17:10:10 <andythenorth_> "groups allow players to..." 17:10:11 <andythenorth_> ? 17:10:18 <andythenorth_> - set liveries 17:10:20 <Brianetta> I remember that 17:10:24 <andythenorth_> - replace vehicles 17:10:27 <Brianetta> yes, I stand by my suggestion 17:10:30 <andythenorth_> send for servicing 17:10:32 <andythenorth_> send to depot 17:10:40 <xiong> Then, I'd be able to perform actions on tagsets: run these, remove (some other tag) from these, copy these to here... 17:10:41 <Rubidium> so only new thing is liveries 17:10:44 <Rubidium> +? 17:10:57 <Eddi|zuHause> this property can be a shared order list (all vehicles with a shared order), an order entry (all vehicles going to station x), a shared consist, a shared livery/company colur, a logical player-assigned grouping, or something completely different 17:11:01 <andythenorth_> I can't see how groups would replace shared orders... 17:11:13 <Alberth> Brianetta: we have a new one: http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=50374 17:11:17 <Brianetta> The groups in my suggestions would be like lines, or services 17:11:24 <Rubidium> andythenorth_: shared orders are an implicit grouping of vehicles 17:11:28 <xiong> Tags can embrace both groups and shared orders. 17:11:37 <Brianetta> You define a service by livery and orders, then add vehicles to it 17:12:04 <Alberth> andythenorth_: shared orders allow easy group-wise changing of orders 17:12:06 <andythenorth_> Brianetta: perfectly reasonable, but there are probably other uses for groups 17:12:07 <Brianetta> Rubidium: Shared orders suck as a concept. Helen *never* understood it, and I'm a patient teacher. 17:12:14 <xiong> Oh wow, I'm so screwed. I should have been asleep hours ago. Trains not to blame entirely for this. See you. 17:12:40 <andythenorth_> for example, I use groups to handle auto-replace of certain vehicles 17:13:09 <andythenorth_> if current shared-orders window allowed auto-replace....I wouldn't use groups much 17:13:11 <Eddi|zuHause> autoreplace would be a sub-feature of consists, imho 17:13:12 <Alberth> andythenorth_: I was thinking to merge replace & renew, I don't see much difference 17:13:44 <Alberth> andythenorth_: I think it is the other way around, if you have groups, you don't need shared orders 17:13:52 <Rubidium> Brianetta: they are just lines without making it explicit that they are lines. It's more the human interaction that is broken than the backend. 17:14:03 <andythenorth_> if you have *nested* groups you don't need shared orders 17:14:06 <Brianetta> Rubidium: Exactly what I meant by "concept." 17:14:17 <Brianetta> She couldn't *conceive* it 17:14:18 <andythenorth_> if groups === shared orders, we broke groups :P 17:14:24 <Alberth> andythenorth_: why nested? 17:14:49 <Brianetta> Alberth: If groups offer more than just liveries, then they can inherit undefined options from containers 17:14:54 <Brianetta> such as liveries 17:14:57 <andythenorth_> ok, so I have five sets of shared orders for iron ore trains. I want to upgrade wagons on three of them... 17:15:00 <andythenorth_> groups let me do that 17:15:01 <Brianetta> and orders 17:15:38 *** Brianetta is now known as Brian_changing_seats 17:15:48 *** Brianetta [~brian@188-220-91-30.zone11.bethere.co.uk] has joined #openttd 17:15:57 *** Brian_changing_seats [~brian@188-220-91-30.zone11.bethere.co.uk] has quit [Quit: TschÃŒÃ] 17:16:15 <Alberth> Brianetta: I am not sure about the inheritance, I think it would break if I have another hierarchy next to it, eg based on carried cargo, or a 'line' of transfers (boat -> train->plane in an extreme case) 17:16:25 <Rubidium> in any case, the major problem with groups is that nobody actually implemented significant changes (AFAIK) 17:16:35 <Rubidium> where changes ought to be improvements 17:16:48 <andythenorth_> maybe we list what's wrong with current groups? 17:17:00 <andythenorth_> - dragging is annoying 17:17:10 <planetmaker> is it? 17:17:15 <Brianetta> Oh yes 17:17:21 <andythenorth_> the implementation is not great 17:17:22 <Eddi|zuHause> no possibility of selecting multiple vehicles and then dragging all of them 17:18:18 * andythenorth_ ponders 17:18:26 <Alberth> better have 'automagic' selection based on some criterium, I think. Manually doing things is too much work :p 17:18:41 <andythenorth_> I want to drag from the list of vehicles using a station...which makes me think - are vehicles using a station implicitly a group? 17:18:56 <Alberth> I'd vote 'yes' :) 17:19:15 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: not really, which is why groups internally need to become more flexible 17:19:45 <Brianetta> One problem with shared orders as they stand, is that they vanish when there are no trains associated with them. 17:19:51 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: imho it should be. then you could also set autoreplace etc. for station or order groups 17:20:03 <Brianetta> There's absolutely no interface for looking at the shared orders that are instantiated. 17:20:29 *** xiong [~xiong@netblock-68-183-253-25.dslextreme.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 17:20:43 <Eddi|zuHause> Brianetta: i agree. a remodeled group gui should have that feature 17:20:47 <Alberth> Brianetta: neither for the non-shared orders, how are shared orders different? 17:20:50 <Brianetta> Being able to bring up a list of shared orders, and to assign liveries to those lists, would be incredible. 17:21:00 *** Fast2 [~Fast2@p57AF952A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #openttd 17:21:10 <Brianetta> Alberth: They're different in that you're actually expected to USE them. 17:21:34 <Brianetta> Non-shared orders are simplicity itself - they're oly associated with one vehicle, and finding them is child's play. 17:22:11 <Brianetta> When you have a vehicle, and a set of shared orders with which you want to join it, you have to find (by trial and error) a vehicle already using those orders. 17:22:26 <Brianetta> If there are no vehicles still using those orders, you must make the orders again from scratch. 17:22:55 <Alberth> I always just pick a random train that does the orders already and share with it 17:22:55 <Brianetta> This leads to ludicrous work-arounds, like a depot full of locomotives used exclusively for orders management. 17:23:04 <Brianetta> Exactly - trial and error. 17:23:20 <Brianetta> It's easy if you know exactly which trains share orders, but sometimes they're not easy to find. 17:23:28 <dihedral> Brianetta, o/ 17:23:28 <Brianetta> You can group them, but you must do that manually, too. 17:23:38 <Brianetta> Hi, dihedral (: 17:23:50 <dihedral> nice to see you so ... chatty :-D 17:23:56 <Alberth> no, I mean random, as in pick a train that has the orders, being shared or not. 17:23:59 <Brianetta> Living with this broken interface is fine if you've grown used to it over the past fifteen years 17:24:20 <Brianetta> If you have two duplicate sets of shared orders, you're in for a fun time 17:24:34 * Alberth nods 17:24:41 <Brianetta> If your last two trains with those orders crash into each other, you'd better share those orders quickly. 17:24:57 <Alberth> that's why you should have groups with *the same* orders, whether shared or not :) 17:25:16 <Brianetta> Orders should be a property of the group 17:25:19 <Brianetta> NOT the vehicle 17:25:31 <Brianetta> Moving a vehicle from one group to another should change its orders 17:26:08 <Brianetta> I suggested hierarchical groups, simply so that each train could be in an implicit gruop of its own 17:26:09 <Alberth> but that makes no sense in general, as the cargo being moved changes then 17:26:13 <Brianetta> for "legacy support" 17:26:27 <Brianetta> Alberth: You don't move trains between groups on a whim 17:26:33 <Brianetta> you refit them, or change consists 17:26:54 <Brianetta> I'd be fine if this could only happen in a depot, although some might see that as an artificial restriction 17:27:19 <Alberth> would you ever have 2 sub-groups with the same trains & same orders? 17:27:32 <Brianetta> no 17:27:33 <planetmaker> why not? 17:27:49 <planetmaker> red line and yellow line. 17:27:52 <planetmaker> Different start times 17:28:01 <planetmaker> but that might count as different orders 17:28:03 <Brianetta> Not with the same train 17:28:18 <Eddi|zuHause> if you move a train from one group to another, and that other group has another consist, it is scheduled for autoreplace on the next depot visit 17:28:45 <Brianetta> Eddi: I'd never considered associating a consist with a group. If it was, then yes, for sure. 17:28:45 <Eddi|zuHause> if the player insists on this being instantaneous, he can send the trian to servicing immediately from the group gui 17:29:13 <Brianetta> Theoretically, liveries should only change in a depot, too (: 17:29:22 <Eddi|zuHause> like i said previously, shared orders and shared consists are really not that different concepts 17:29:32 <Brianetta> Just like real life, busy trains might not get their new colours for years 17:29:47 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: rubidium * r20963 /trunk/ (13 files in 6 dirs): -Add: stubs for a remote administration connection 17:29:48 <Brianetta> Eddi: I'm fine with that; it's a sound idea 17:29:57 <dihedral> \o/ 17:30:23 <Brianetta> Orders, consists and liveries, as properties of a group, which would override the vehicle's own properties 17:30:38 <Brianetta> and which could be managed from an explicit list box 17:30:41 <Eddi|zuHause> yes 17:30:54 <Brianetta> I'd be totally happy with that 17:31:18 <Eddi|zuHause> biggest problem with that is probably designing a sensible gui 17:31:27 <Alberth> Brianetta: probably not, but it is as far as we can think without having an implementation :) 17:31:29 <Brianetta> Hierarchical groups gives more fun things, like a coal livery containing loads of coal services 17:31:30 <Eddi|zuHause> but the other parts are probably not trivial either 17:32:04 <Alberth> Eddi|zuHause: GUI design is where I am very stuck :( 17:32:20 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: rubidium * r20964 /trunk/src/network/ (network_admin.cpp network_admin.h): -Add: disconnecting remote admins that fail to authenticate 17:33:06 <dihedral> \o/ 17:33:18 <dihedral> how many pieces have you turned this into?? 17:33:29 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: rubidium * r20965 /trunk/src/settings_type.h: -Fix: typo in comment 17:33:43 <planetmaker> dihedral: many :-) 17:33:43 <andythenorth_> why would orders === consist? 17:33:52 <Alberth> dihedral: one semantical change == one commit 17:34:12 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: rubidium * r20966 /trunk/src/ (5 files in 3 dirs): -Change: enable remote administration sockets (parts by Yexo and dihedral) 17:34:27 <Alberth> andythenorth_: I am not convinced that is a good limitation yet 17:34:29 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: Orders require that a vehicle can carry the goods in question 17:34:32 <andythenorth_> no 17:34:35 <b_jonas> what I'd like is a "sell" order where you can send a vehicle to depot and it will sell itself when it arrives 17:34:49 <andythenorth_> orders *may* require that a vehicle can carry the goods in question 17:34:53 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: rubidium * r20967 /trunk/src/ (7 files in 3 dirs): -Add: infrastructure to send information to remote admins at specific intervals (dihedral) 17:34:57 <Brianetta> Hierarchical groups would allow a group with orders to contain a couple of different consists (-: 17:35:00 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: both orders and consists are virtual objects, which then make trains obey to them 17:35:04 <planetmaker> Brianetta: orders only include a station. Not a cargo 17:35:10 <andythenorth_> orders include stations 17:35:16 <andythenorth_> consists have to be different 17:35:29 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: rubidium * r20968 /trunk/src/network/ (4 files in 2 dirs): -Add: date notification of remote admins (dihedral) 17:35:33 <andythenorth_> are vehicles passing through a bouy or waypoint implicitly a group? 17:35:51 <andythenorth_> are 'all vehicles which can carry more than 96t of iron ore' implicitly a group? 17:35:53 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: they should be 17:35:56 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: rubidium * r20969 /trunk/src/network/ (5 files in 2 dirs): -Add: client info change notification to remote admins (dihedral) 17:36:03 <andythenorth_> are 'all vehicles with reliability < 75%' implicitly a group? 17:36:16 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: rubidium * r20970 /trunk/src/ (8 files in 3 dirs): -Add: company change notification to remote admins (dihedral) 17:36:29 <Eddi|zuHause> yes to all of those, if the implementation would get flexible enough 17:36:34 <Alberth> andythenorth_: I see no reason to limit such conditions, at least conceptually. Perhaps in the implementation 17:36:39 <andythenorth_> so what *isn't* a group 17:36:40 <andythenorth_> ? 17:36:47 <Hirundo> 'all vehicles built on mondays' ? 17:36:48 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: rubidium * r20971 /trunk/src/network/ (4 files in 2 dirs): -Add: company economy updates at intervals to remote admins (dihedral) 17:36:54 <glx> HL time for dihedral 17:36:56 <Alberth> andythenorth_: nothing, a group is what you say is a group 17:36:57 <glx> :) 17:36:59 <planetmaker> :-) 17:37:03 <andythenorth_> I don't think we can define group===shared orders, nor group===consist 17:37:16 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: rubidium * r20972 /trunk/src/network/ (4 files in 2 dirs): -Add: company statistics updates at intervals to remote admins (dihedral) 17:37:16 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: A group is a list of vehicles 17:37:19 <planetmaker> consist is concerning orders a single vehicle 17:37:19 <andythenorth_> yes 17:37:36 <andythenorth_> so the concepts for 'orders' and 'consist' need to be separate entities 17:37:36 <Brianetta> What we're proposing is that a group can have vehicular attributes, which override those of its members 17:38:00 <andythenorth_> and there need to be ways to manipulate orders and consists 17:38:02 <Eddi|zuHause> a group is a list of vehicles, and it can (but not must) have properties like an order list, a consist or a livery 17:38:06 <Brianetta> You could use them for liveries, orders, consists or any combination thereof 17:38:19 <andythenorth_> you would assign a group to use a set of orders 17:38:27 <andythenorth_> but the set of orders exists independently of the group 17:38:32 <Alberth> s/would/could/ 17:38:38 <andythenorth_> think of this in two stages 17:38:50 <Brianetta> If (and only if) groups could contain other groups, then properties could *be overridden* be child groups, where devined 17:38:50 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: rubidium * r20973 /trunk/src/ (8 files in 4 dirs): -Add: chat sending and receiving support for remote admins (dihedral) 17:38:51 <andythenorth_> first select objects to group, then manipulate them somehow 17:38:56 <Brianetta> defined, too 17:39:04 *** KouDy [~KouDy@ip-89-176-97-213.net.upcbroadband.cz] has joined #openttd 17:39:29 <andythenorth_> so the two questions are (a) how to manipulate groups (add/remove members) (b) what affordances there are to manipulate objects in groups 17:39:33 <Brianetta> I'd like the current shared orders pointer scheme to be ditched, of groups could emulate it 17:39:39 <Brianetta> It's hard to understand 17:39:42 <andythenorth_> forget current schemes :) 17:39:44 <Alberth> andythenorth_: I think so, basically, instead of modifying 1 vehicle at a time, modify a group 17:39:45 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: i'd define it as "two groups may not share the same set of orders". that might make things easier compared to the current shared order implementation 17:39:47 <Brianetta> It's a barrier to new players 17:40:09 <andythenorth_> why couldn't two groups could share the same set of orders? 17:40:11 <dihedral> no need for ap+ again :-D 17:40:16 <dihedral> whoopies 17:40:16 <Brianetta> Groups wouldn't share orders. They'd just *have* orders. 17:40:23 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: rubidium * r20974 /trunk/src/ (6 files in 3 dirs): -Add: remote console (rcon) for remote admins (dihedral) 17:40:27 <planetmaker> Brianetta: in my words: you want the fundamental reference for orders to be a group, not a vehicle (as now). Right? 17:40:30 <Eddi|zuHause> so two vehicles share the orders if and only if they are both member of this one group that defines the orders 17:40:41 <Brianetta> If you want two groups to have orders shared between them, let groups belong to groups. 17:40:50 <Brianetta> planetmaker: Bang on. 17:40:51 * andythenorth_ thinks orders can't be defined by groups 17:41:03 * Alberth thinks so too 17:41:05 <Brianetta> planetmaker: With liveries on groups too, for optimum fun 17:41:05 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: orders are defined by order windows 17:41:07 <andythenorth_> orders should be defined by orders 17:41:13 <andythenorth_> consists should be defined by consists 17:41:22 <andythenorth_> but making such a big change to orders scares me :P 17:41:22 <planetmaker> Brianetta: that's only added benefit. Maybe later 17:41:26 <Eddi|zuHause> the group would get an order window like the vehicles have 17:41:31 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: rubidium * r20975 /trunk/src/ (6 files in 3 dirs): -Add: logging of console output for remote admins (dihedral) 17:41:35 <andythenorth_> scares me as a player, nvm coding it :P 17:41:58 <planetmaker> well. I still like that idea :-) 17:41:59 <andythenorth_> orders == routes? 17:42:08 <planetmaker> kinda 17:42:09 <andythenorth_> probably orders == orders :P 17:42:11 <Alberth> andythenorth_: I think it is vital to keep a simple 'modify one vehicle at a time' interface too 17:42:30 <andythenorth_> that's just manipulating an 'order' somewhere in the sets of orders 17:42:38 <planetmaker> that makes it complicated, Alberth :-) 17:42:49 <andythenorth_> some of you a much more mathematically smarter than me - this should resolve to a maths problem 17:42:52 <andythenorth_> ! 17:42:59 <Brianetta> In Simutrans, you make lines, and assign your vehicles to them. 17:42:59 <andythenorth_> it's just sets and entities isn't it? 17:43:03 <Alberth> planetmaker: you cannot expect a child of 10 to understand groups and have fun with the game imho 17:43:06 <Rubidium> Alberth: they would get their *own* group 17:43:13 <Brianetta> Alberth: You can, though 17:43:14 <planetmaker> though not necessarily: the orders could show as top line the group it belongs to. 17:43:34 <planetmaker> Alberth: it was no argument agains that :-) 17:43:46 <Alberth> Brianetta: do you have feeder servives in simutrans? 17:43:52 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: translators * r20976 /trunk/src/lang/ (finnish.txt hungarian.txt slovenian.txt): 17:43:52 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: -Update from WebTranslator v3.0: 17:43:52 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: finnish - 1 changes by jpx_ 17:43:52 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: hungarian - 1 changes by IPG 17:43:52 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: slovenian - 1 changes by ntadej 17:43:54 <Brianetta> Alberth: Yes. 17:44:09 <Brianetta> Alberth: Simutrans is entirely feeder driven. 17:44:25 <Eddi|zuHause> imho it would "simply" be that you move the current order lists from (front-) vehicles to groups. and remove the special code for shared orders. 17:44:37 <Brianetta> It's had cargo packets since day one, and they've had to go to the place they were sent, not just somewhere like it. 17:44:39 <Rubidium> more to the point, Simutrans enforces cargod*st 17:44:40 * andythenorth_ ponders 17:44:56 <Eddi|zuHause> and all places that would look up the orders of a vehicle, look up the groups that this vehicle belongs to 17:45:16 <andythenorth_> if a vehicle is in two groups that define orders? 17:45:22 <Alberth> Eddi|zuHause: that's mostly implementation stuff, let's keep it out for now? 17:45:38 <planetmaker> Alberth: it basically means that modifying a vehicle orders is either creating a new group or modifying the group orders of that vehicle 17:45:49 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: That's where my idea for hierarchical groups comes into play. You can't give a vehicle more than one group. 17:46:02 <andythenorth_> which is nice for your use case, but very specific :P 17:46:07 <andythenorth_> it breaks my game 17:46:13 <Eddi|zuHause> Brianetta: i don't think that will work out hierarchically 17:46:15 <Brianetta> Any more than you can put a file into more than one directory (ina filesystem without hardlinks) 17:46:18 <b_jonas> and I wish the lorry station tool + remove would also remove bus stations and vice versa 17:46:21 <Eddi|zuHause> then you can't have station groups 17:46:23 <Eddi|zuHause> or similar 17:46:27 <Alberth> Brianetta: how would you replace all engines that eg transfer wood? 17:46:38 <Brianetta> or a Windows Active Directory user into more than one Organisational Unit 17:46:51 <Brianetta> Alberth: The hard way, as ever 17:46:56 <Hirundo> Alberth: Define a group 'wood trains' with subgroups for all 'lines' 17:47:00 <Brianetta> or, a group which contains all wood services 17:47:04 <Alberth> Brianetta: I'd like to have a group for that too 17:47:09 <andythenorth_> Brianetta: a 'dividing' question: do you file your email in hierarchical folders, or use search? 17:47:14 <andythenorth_> most people are strictly one or the other 17:47:17 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: Both. 17:47:27 <andythenorth_> bah 17:47:29 <Hirundo> andythenorth_: nice analogue 17:47:29 <Brianetta> procmail sorts into folders, and I search only rarely. 17:47:49 <Brianetta> You can always add tags to trains (-: 17:48:02 <Alberth> Brianetta: I think we'd need groups not only for orders but also for other things, and/or we need a vehicle to be in more than one group. 17:48:05 <Brianetta> Then you can have cloud trains 17:48:05 <andythenorth_> I know people who would sooner die than stop filing email hierarchically 17:48:08 <Brianetta> where you own no trains 17:48:14 <andythenorth_> but they still end up using search 17:48:15 <Brianetta> but simply pay to have trains do stuff 17:48:44 <andythenorth_> this is a relational problem not a hierarchical one 17:48:48 <Hirundo> Alberth: how often would you do different things to trains with the same orders? 17:48:50 * andythenorth_ has learnt this the hard way 17:48:54 <andythenorth_> in another place 17:49:01 <Alberth> Brianetta: I see a group more as a tag attached to a train 17:49:04 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: Trains really aren't emails 17:49:07 <b_jonas> andythenorth_: I do both with my emails 17:49:13 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: rubidium * r20977 /trunk/src/ (console.cpp debug.cpp): -Fix (r20975): compilation didn't get to the link stage if you, or config.lib, decided you don't need network support 17:49:29 <b_jonas> but they're different from trains 17:49:34 <Hirundo> It's indeed the fundamental question whether to use a 'tagging' or 'hierarchy' system 17:49:39 <andythenorth_> the problem is effectively the same 17:49:48 <b_jonas> no, they're not 17:49:49 <andythenorth_> I've built web apps on a hierarchical structure 17:50:06 <andythenorth_> then I've had proper developers come along and replace it all with correct relational databases :P 17:50:12 <b_jonas> for emails, I use groups because there are some mailing lists I don't want to appear in my inbox, but read them only occasionally in batches 17:50:15 <Alberth> Hirundo: not often, but mostly by accident perhaps, as orders visit stations, they do not say anything about cargo (maybe they should though) 17:50:18 <andythenorth_> groups are a relation between vehicles 17:50:25 <andythenorth_> they aren't a hierarchy 17:50:30 <Brianetta> Alberth: If trains can belong to several groups, then you will ened some disambiguation mechanims where different groups give orders. Such as, only belonging to one group with orders specified. A hierarchy does solve this, but there are other methods. 17:50:44 * andythenorth_ tries to find a way to do more than just assert stuff :P 17:50:45 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: rubidium * r20978 /trunk/src/network/network.cpp: -Fix (r20963): MSVC seems to be complaining more than GCC once again :) 17:50:50 * Alberth agrees with Brianetta 17:50:57 <andythenorth_> Brianetta: you are still thinking groups give orders 17:50:59 <andythenorth_> that would be broken 17:51:02 <andythenorth_> :D 17:51:07 <andythenorth_> orders are orders 17:51:09 <Hirundo> 'tagging' is more flexible, but opens up the multiple inheritance-worm can 17:51:10 <andythenorth_> groups are not orders 17:51:31 <Eddi|zuHause> the user interface for player-defined groups may be hierarchical, but the implicit groups e.g. for "all vehicles visiting station X" must be relational 17:51:31 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: I don't care what you call them. We need some sort of method for giving and sharing orders that doesn' trely on a stupid memory pointer and guesswork. 17:51:33 <andythenorth_> if orders are all we need, simply remove groups from the current game, and allow assigning colour to current shared orders 17:51:33 <Hirundo> Assigning orders to a group, which then apply to all vehicles therein, is very sensible IMO 17:51:38 <Alberth> Hirundo: perhaps not do inheritance? 17:51:54 <andythenorth_> don't do inheritance 17:51:59 <andythenorth_> any of you ever write css? 17:52:09 <Brianetta> Current shared orders are THE MOST broken concept in the game. 17:52:10 <andythenorth_> cascading inheritance is a necessary evil, but very evil 17:52:12 <b_jonas> but groups are a special case of labels: you can have an option which makes manually adding a train to a group remove it from any other group to which it was added manualy 17:52:15 <Hirundo> Even without inheritance, what is the colour of a train is in both group 'BLUE' and 'RED'? 17:52:25 <Brianetta> It's impossible to explain to newcomers, and I've tried several times. 17:52:26 <andythenorth_> bled 17:52:48 <Hirundo> andythenorth_: exactly, it causes bloody victims ;) 17:53:03 <Rubidium> Hirundo: easy, both via 2cc 17:53:04 <Brianetta> In fact, orders is the only thing that I want to use groups for. 17:53:06 <planetmaker> [19:53] <Brianetta> Current shared orders are THE MOST broken concept in the game. <-- I don't share that view 17:53:10 <Terkhen> what could replace shared orders? 17:53:16 *** Eddi|zuHause [~johekr@p54B76E28.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 17:53:18 <Brianetta> Terkhen: Read up. 17:53:19 <Alberth> Hirundo: don't allow such conflicts to happen?, ie you cannot drop that vehicle or you cannot assign a colour 17:53:20 <andythenorth_> Terkhen: 'orders' 17:53:20 <planetmaker> It 'just' needs to be interpreted as a group. And shown as such in the group view 17:53:39 <Brianetta> That, or shared orders lists should exist explicitly 17:53:47 <planetmaker> and it then could also be implemented the other way around 17:53:50 <andythenorth_> ^^ what he just said 17:53:56 *** Eddi|zuHause [~johekr@p54B76E28.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #openttd 17:54:01 <andythenorth_> shared order lists should exist explicitly 17:54:03 <andythenorth_> as orders 17:54:03 <Brianetta> rather than the current mthod of looking for a train that looks like it's going the way you need, examining its orders, then asking your new train to share its orders. 17:54:17 <andythenorth_> Brianetta: you don't use the station view of vehicles? 17:54:22 <andythenorth_> makes it trivial 17:54:23 <planetmaker> Brianetta: it needs not be an either or. As Alberth explained 17:54:28 <planetmaker> It needs to be a two-way thing 17:54:36 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: Stations can appear in a significant number of orders lists 17:54:42 <andythenorth_> true 17:54:44 <Brianetta> especially if you're playing passengers 17:54:45 <andythenorth_> I run into that 17:54:54 <andythenorth_> ships are prone to that 17:55:04 <Brianetta> That's just another method of hunting for a vehicle 17:55:10 <andythenorth_> agree 17:55:12 <Brianetta> it's trial and error, and that's not clever 17:55:35 <andythenorth_> select into group -> perform operation 17:55:39 <andythenorth_> hmm 17:55:41 * andythenorth_ ponders 17:55:53 <andythenorth_> what if 'change livery' is just instant for a group 17:56:09 <andythenorth_> I need the correct comp sci term 17:56:30 <andythenorth_> it's an object verb operation: I choose my group, then do the operation 'make everything in this group red' 17:56:36 <andythenorth_> think of it as a tool, not a setting 17:56:37 <Eddi|zuHause> changing company colours is instantly currently 17:56:44 <Brianetta> What we need, if not groups, is an incredibly group-like interface to orders. 17:56:58 <andythenorth_> Eddi|zuHause yes, but we're assuming there's a drop down menu somewhere to define livery for a group 17:57:10 <andythenorth_> photoshop doesn't have a drop down menu for groups of pixels, I just flood fill 17:57:15 <Brianetta> It would be instant, in teh first instance 17:57:16 <planetmaker> Brianetta: that's what I mean with it should work two-way 17:57:34 * andythenorth_ thinks of an orders GUI 17:57:37 * andythenorth_ is scared of it 17:57:38 <Brianetta> planetmaker: Sure; as I said, though, there would have to be disambiguation 17:57:41 <andythenorth_> but it's the right thing to do 17:57:48 <planetmaker> orders of a vehicle are in the group. But you can modify the group / or vehicle from the existing orders window of the vehicle 17:58:02 <planetmaker> it'd need a means to select "group" or "this vehicle only". 17:58:08 <planetmaker> The latter'd create a new group 17:58:14 <andythenorth_> planetmaker: I thought the same 17:58:17 <Brianetta> planetmaker: Sure thing; the "end of shared orders" could read "end of group orders" 17:58:18 <andythenorth_> can't think how to make it 'esy' 17:58:22 <andythenorth_> easy /s 17:58:28 <planetmaker> like that 17:58:43 <planetmaker> maybe :-) 17:58:48 <Brianetta> but the group window could have an orders button on the bottom right, just like a vehicle window 17:58:53 <Eddi|zuHause> the multiple-inheritance-problem for orders and liveries may be solved like this: when a group order is changed, it does a depth-first search through its vehicles, and sets a pointer in the vehicle "orders are used from this group" 17:59:45 <andythenorth_> Eddi|zuHause: what does that mean? :) 17:59:47 <Eddi|zuHause> assuming groups have some way to decide whether another group is a sub-group or overlapping group 17:59:54 <Brianetta> Or, if we're talking about specific groups for orders alone (aka "lines" or "services") then we could just ban using more than one group per vehicle. 18:00:10 <andythenorth_> turn it upside down, think of it as tools.... 18:00:15 <andythenorth_> imagine sets of orders 18:00:18 <Brianetta> Those would exist alongside current groups. 18:00:30 <andythenorth_> now pick a group....assign all vehicles in group to use order set xyz 18:00:41 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: Simutrans gets it right already. You define your orders before you even have a vehicle, if you want. 18:00:42 <andythenorth_> don't think of it as a setting 18:00:52 <andythenorth_> Brianetta: screenshot the gui and post it somewhere 18:01:08 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: I'll have to install simutrans first... 18:01:16 <Brianetta> Simutrans gets *track* wrong (-: 18:01:23 <Eddi|zuHause> Brianetta: i'd like to allow taking any group, and add a livery/order/consist/whatever to that group, regardless of what other groups the vehicles belong to 18:01:31 <andythenorth_> *forget* the current livery gui, and think of photoshop or something, this will all seem easier 18:01:39 <andythenorth_> sets of orders 18:02:04 <Brianetta> Eddi: Me too, but that's too much culture shock 18:02:06 <Eddi|zuHause> and have the internal logic take care about possible overlaps between two groups that both define orders 18:02:12 <Rubidium> photoshop is easier as there the pixels don't move, so freeform selecting pixels is easier than freeform selecting trains on a map 18:02:17 <andythenorth_> :D 18:02:53 <andythenorth_> what's the comp sci terms I want? User can perform operations to entities in the group? Entities are mutable? 18:03:02 <andythenorth_> hmm 18:03:15 <andythenorth_> in my model, what happens when I add a new member to the group? 18:03:16 <andythenorth_> fail 18:03:24 <andythenorth_> I have to repeat my operation :( 18:04:42 <Alberth> if you 'attach' a property to a group, anything you add to the group gets the property 18:04:54 <andythenorth_> but then overlapping is a horrible problem 18:05:12 <andythenorth_> what properties could the group define? 18:05:14 <andythenorth_> livery 18:05:16 <andythenorth_> orders 18:05:17 <andythenorth_> consist 18:05:18 *** theholyduck [~holyduck@ti112220a080-0782.bb.online.no] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 18:05:21 <Brianetta> No screenies, but: 18:05:22 <Brianetta> http://en.wiki.simutrans.com/index.php/Schedule 18:05:26 <andythenorth_> (consist handles autoreplace) 18:05:29 <Brianetta> http://en.wiki.simutrans.com/index.php/Line 18:05:43 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, the internal logic must take care of the parts that may not overlap 18:05:57 <Eddi|zuHause> but not all properties need exclusiveness 18:06:00 <Alberth> otherwise, your group can have different values for the same property 18:06:14 <Zuu> Is having a firewall rules kind of list of groups a solution? Eg. first group on the list can decide over group settings below? 18:06:15 <Brianetta> http://simutrans-germany.com/wiki/wiki/tiki-index.php?page=en_Schedules_and_Lines 18:06:30 <Brianetta> Zuu: Not a bad idea at all. 18:06:47 * andythenorth_ ponders 18:06:53 <andythenorth_> this seems a little complicated :D 18:06:54 <Alberth> basically any form of disambiguation is good :) 18:06:59 <Eddi|zuHause> Zuu: that needs a way to define a chronology of groups 18:06:59 <Zuu> The problem is if this is a GUI that just sits around somewhere and users aren't really aware of it. 18:07:19 <andythenorth_> what is the problem with that? (just asking you to expand it) :) 18:07:30 <Alberth> Eddi|zuHause: order of appearance or order of definition 18:07:31 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: You have to remember, that you want each vehicle to behave very explicitly. You don't want it to try to do or be more than one thing at once. The UI doesn' tneed to have to let it. 18:07:46 <Zuu> And we already don't like that users should need to be aware of the newGrf load order. 18:07:50 <Eddi|zuHause> especially, that needs a way to reorder them. 18:08:14 *** De_Ghosty [~s@69-196-131-160.dsl.teksavvy.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 18:08:21 <Alberth> drag/drop ? 18:08:28 <planetmaker> ^ 18:08:29 <Eddi|zuHause> including possibly hundreds of implicit groups, like station groups 18:08:45 *** Bobbysepp [62e13520@ircip1.mibbit.com] has joined #openttd 18:09:01 <andythenorth_> question: do liveries really matter? 18:09:11 <Eddi|zuHause> yes 18:09:14 <andythenorth_> like, *really*? 18:09:15 <Brianetta> Eddi|zuHause: Implicit groups can be excluded 18:09:37 <Eddi|zuHause> local transport in city A should be red/white, local transport in city B should be yellow/blue 18:09:42 <andythenorth_> if reworking groups had one each of primary, secondary, and tertiary goal, what would they be? 18:09:46 <Brianetta> You don't want to assign orders to a station, because until it gets orders, the vehicle won't go to the station to join the group to get its orders 18:10:07 <planetmaker> each group could have properties orders / livery / refit rules 18:10:25 <Brianetta> Implicit groups should be read-only, for-reference 18:10:30 <andythenorth_> for me: primary: support consists: secondary: support better shared orders manipulation; tertiary, don't care 18:10:32 <Alberth> planetmaker: + auto renew/replace 18:10:33 <planetmaker> and a flag for each of those [force|allow redefine] - and then it could allow sub-groups 18:10:43 <planetmaker> Alberth: yes 18:10:47 <Brianetta> You can command them, but not configure them 18:10:50 <planetmaker> meant that with refit 18:11:00 <Zuu> And a vehicle may only have one group that defines orders / livery / refit rules? 18:11:09 <andythenorth_> yes 18:11:10 <Zuu> So up to 3 groups if they only define one of each.. 18:11:15 <Alberth> planetmaker: ah, already covered thus :) 18:11:55 <andythenorth_> Zuu: refit rules means? 18:11:57 <Eddi|zuHause> Brianetta: fine, but then it needs a button "create an explicit group out of this implicit group" 18:12:01 <Alberth> Zuu: seems like a sane idea at this time :) 18:12:11 <andythenorth_> Eddi|zuHause: used anything that has a 'save this search'? 18:12:42 <Brianetta> Eddi|zuHause: That's acceptable 18:12:50 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: never seen any useful appliance of that... or in places where it really mattered, that option was not supplied 18:13:00 <andythenorth_> I use it to organise email :P 18:13:04 <andythenorth_> but anyway 18:13:07 <Zuu> I like the planetmaker idea of [force|allow redefine] 18:13:12 <andythenorth_> Eddi|zuHause it's the same affordance you just described 18:13:30 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: yes, i see that ;) 18:13:49 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: One email can have several purposes. Delivery vehicles in the TT world are, thankfully, rather simpler creatures. 18:15:13 <andythenorth_> how so? 18:15:23 <Brianetta> They do one job. 18:15:38 <andythenorth_> but an email just moves some bits from one place to another 18:15:38 <Brianetta> They follow exactly one set of orders, indefinitely. 18:15:50 <andythenorth_> an email just follows the rules in it's headers 18:16:09 <Brianetta> An email can have contexts, recipients, content and attachments entirely unique to it. No two emails are like; two vehicles might well be identical. 18:16:09 <andythenorth_> the several purposes are all imposed by the user :) 18:16:24 <Rubidium> an email without orders doesn't work, a TT vehicle without orders does "work" (for varying degrees of work) 18:16:27 * andythenorth_ is getting sidetracked :) 18:16:51 <Brianetta> We don't need the sort of tag soup we need for emails, because many of our vehicles are, deliberately, identical. 18:17:20 <andythenorth_> one 'groups' gui - each group has multiple settings....or multiple guis (one for orders, one for liveries, etc.), with groups in them 18:17:21 <andythenorth_> ? 18:17:40 <Brianetta> erm 18:17:45 * Brianetta parses that carefully 18:17:52 <Alberth> that's just a matter of adding a grop-down, isn't it? 18:17:55 <Brianetta> yes, I think 18:17:58 <Alberth> *drop-down 18:18:06 <Brianetta> If groups can contain groups, then they really should have hierarchy 18:18:17 <Brianetta> Otherwise you open to door to circular references, etc 18:18:47 <b_jonas> wait... does ottd 1.0.4 have high bridges enabled? 18:19:01 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: the main feature of the new group gui would be "show groups by [order, consist, livery, other]" 18:19:29 <Eddi|zuHause> then some ordering and filtering feature 18:19:50 *** Adambean [AdamR@82.hosts.reece-eu.net] has joined #openttd 18:20:16 <andythenorth_> it's probably right, but I'm feeling baffled :D 18:20:23 <Eddi|zuHause> so i could say things like: "show me all tram lines that go to A-Town Mainstation" 18:20:48 <andythenorth_> ottd-google 18:20:56 <Eddi|zuHause> and it would list me the groups "A-Town Line 2, A-Town Line 3 and A-Town Line 5" 18:21:46 <Eddi|zuHause> which are subgroups of the "A-Town Tram Lines" group [which defines the livery] 18:21:57 <Alberth> b_jonas: I think it allows bridges over deep canyons yes 18:22:07 <b_jonas> Alberth: ah, great 18:22:15 <b_jonas> I just noticed that an opponent built such a bridge 18:22:20 <Alberth> b_jonas: it is much easier to simply try it 18:22:48 *** theholyduck [~holyduck@ti112220a080-0782.bb.online.no] has joined #openttd 18:23:55 <Eddi|zuHause> the last line, along with introducing consists, whould be secondary goal, the lines before would be primary goal 18:24:35 <Rubidium> b_jonas: nah, they are only supported since 0.3.0, so 1.0.4 can't have them 18:25:03 *** fjb is now known as Guest3088 18:25:05 *** fjb [~frank@p5DDFEB62.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #openttd 18:25:19 <andythenorth_> ok 18:25:47 <andythenorth_> so I'm going to put 2p on this being how most players expect to interact with train orders, refit and livery 18:25:47 <andythenorth_> http://tt-foundry.com/misc/groups_groups.png 18:25:58 <andythenorth_> what do I click to do what if we rework groups 18:26:14 <andythenorth_> I left consists out, because they are currently depot-based, and that'll need to change :P 18:26:25 <Eddi|zuHause> that doesn't look like the right image 18:26:29 * andythenorth_ will try and write this as some kind of user stories 18:26:43 <andythenorth_> 'bob wants to set a livery for this train' 18:26:51 <andythenorth_> where does bob click? 18:27:09 <b_jonas> I'll try. I'm just surprised because I don't remember reading this in the changes. I know such a patch was planned, but I didn't know it was in 1.0.4 18:27:15 <Rubidium> on the buggy button 18:27:18 <b_jonas> strange 18:27:28 <Rubidium> b_jonas: it was implemented in 2004 18:27:50 <planetmaker> :-) 18:28:07 <andythenorth_> 'alice wants to put this train in an order group' 18:28:10 <andythenorth_> where does alice click? 18:28:21 <b_jonas> there are so many things there are implemented as patches but aren't in the stable release 18:28:29 <Rubidium> andythenorth_: on the buggy button 18:28:34 <andythenorth_> :D 18:28:35 <b_jonas> like diagonal dinamite/landscaping 18:28:36 <b_jonas> etc 18:28:48 <andythenorth_> Rubidium: is it more buggy in the mac port :P 18:29:04 <planetmaker> b_jonas: but that is for ages in trunk / stables 18:29:25 <Alberth> b_jonas: new changes are developed constantly 18:29:31 <planetmaker> psst, you push work in my direction, andythenorth_ ;-) 18:29:41 <b_jonas> sure 18:29:56 <planetmaker> quite productive weekend actually 18:30:09 <andythenorth_> 'susan wants to change the consist used by this train' 18:30:11 <andythenorth_> where does she click? 18:30:18 <Alberth> b_jonas: and it costs a lot of time to get them right, that's why there are so many 18:30:30 <Rubidium> andythenorth_: same button, as she should know what the other buttons do 18:30:32 <Alberth> in a consist-defining group? 18:31:08 <Brianetta> Fixing shared orders would get me playing again. 18:31:12 <Rubidium> the point is, you can point at the current buttons but that makes no real sense. If you want to change it, you better change the icons as well. Otherwise you'll get into a support nightmare 18:31:20 <andythenorth_> yup 18:31:33 <Rubidium> Brianetta: what does fixing entail exactly? 18:31:38 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: "eddi was careless in organizing his few vehicles, but now with lots of vehicles he wants to group the vehicles into city/regional/express groups" 18:31:38 <andythenorth_> but unless someone knows how the buttons should be changed.... 18:31:43 <Brianetta> Rubidium: Moving away from guesswork 18:32:16 <andythenorth_> "eddi seems to need a search-by-arbitrary-criteria and add-to-group framework" 18:32:17 *** Guest3088 [~frank@p5DDFD02F.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 18:32:38 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: that's a task i have done more than once, and it's very tedious 18:33:12 <Alberth> ah, you have experience :p 18:33:23 <andythenorth_> Brianetta: shared orders are guesswork when you're trying to find a vehicle to clone? 18:33:32 <Brianetta> yes 18:33:44 <Rubidium> but it doesn't get much better with unnamed groups 18:33:50 *** asnoehu [~thok@524B7349.cm-4-4b.dynamic.ziggo.nl] has quit [Quit: If I were a rich man, Ya ha deedle deedle, bubba bubba deedle deedle dum. All day long I'd biddy biddy bum. If I were a wealthy man.] 18:33:52 <planetmaker> hm, the nightly takes its time 18:33:52 <andythenorth_> so if you could see all sets of shared orders you would be happy? 18:33:54 <Rubidium> or do you want to name the groups automagically? 18:34:05 <planetmaker> if possible: yes 18:34:09 <Rubidium> in which case the names either get horribly long, or are very similar 18:34:23 <andythenorth_> Brianetta: if there was a list of *all* orders there have ever been would that serve your needs? 18:34:32 * andythenorth_ suspects it's not possible to cache all that :P 18:34:55 <TrueBrain> meh! I wish minecarts were stable in Minecraft multiplayer ... /me goes being annoyed 18:35:06 <Rubidium> e.g. all trains starting from "Berlin Hbf" pass "Berlin Zoo", so all shared orders from those trains will be "Berlin Hbf - Berlin Zo..." 18:35:16 <Rubidium> doesn't remove much of the guessing I'd guess 18:35:38 <Alberth> allowing to rename a group would be good :) 18:35:40 <b_jonas> I shouldn't complain. After all, I haven't done anything to improve ottd. 18:35:48 <andythenorth_> groups can be renamed 18:35:53 <andythenorth_> shared orders can't 18:36:02 <Rubidium> yes, but shared orders can be put into a group 18:36:07 <Alberth> shared orders have no name :) 18:36:20 <andythenorth_> ergo cannot be renamed :) 18:36:40 <Rubidium> but you can name them as groups without much hassle 18:36:40 <andythenorth_> all vehicles using an order can be put in a group though, which is close... 18:36:50 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: If that list could be used to assign them, then you've basically implemented it 18:36:58 <Rubidium> it's like one or two extra steps 18:37:03 <andythenorth_> so that has nothing to do with groups, and everything to do with orders? 18:37:27 <andythenorth_> 'brianetta has no needs that are met by current groups, nor would be met by a change to groups' 18:37:29 <Rubidium> shared orders are just implicit (fairly) invisible groups 18:37:31 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: Read up. I've sugegsted "group-like" several times. 18:37:31 <andythenorth_> ;) 18:37:46 <Brianetta> Current groups have little use. 18:37:53 <andythenorth_> ^^ I know, but it's a long and noisy discussion 18:38:04 <Alberth> andythenorth_: Briannetta is just very order-oriented :) 18:38:14 <Rubidium> groups work perfectly for me :) 18:38:17 <andythenorth_> 'eddi wants to be able to search vehicles and save the results as a group' 18:38:23 <andythenorth_> groups work near-perfect for me 18:38:24 <Brianetta> No, I want liveries and orders both (: 18:38:32 <Rubidium> to replace engines and such on specific groups of trains 18:38:35 <Brianetta> Groups work, sure, but they do very little. 18:38:46 <Brianetta> They're just an orders broadcast list. 18:38:48 <andythenorth_> Brianetta: I want lots of ponies, but I don't get them :) 18:39:04 <Brianetta> s/orders/commands. 18:39:09 <andythenorth_> ah 18:39:11 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: Make sens 18:39:15 <Eddi|zuHause> "Mandy wants for her parents to buy them a pony" 18:39:17 <Brianetta> please, make some sense 18:39:29 <andythenorth_> http://i-want-a-pony.com/ 18:39:40 <Brianetta> I couldn't give two hoots whether groups continue unchanged 18:39:53 <dihedral> <Brianetta> please, make some sense <- we could have used that line a few days ago :-D 18:40:00 <Brianetta> That thread from September 2008 still have my answers to most of the arguments 18:40:29 <andythenorth_> I read it, I'm just trying to separate proposed implementation from actual problem :) 18:40:31 <Brianetta> My needs haven't changed a jot since then 18:41:01 <andythenorth_> does it make *any* sense to have a 'liveries' gui? 18:41:11 * andythenorth_ ponders 18:41:11 <Brianetta> The problem is that the current shared orders have no useful interface of their own, and that liveries aren't as versatile as they could be 18:41:29 <Brianetta> If you thin kI have a problem with groups, you've mis-understood everything. 18:41:43 <andythenorth_> nah, I think they don't serve your needs, that's the main probelm 18:41:45 <andythenorth_> problem /s 18:41:54 <Brianetta> Keep your groups 18:41:58 <Brianetta> I'm not interested in them 18:42:14 <Brianetta> You're not understanding the problem in the slightest 18:43:01 * andythenorth_ thinks 18:43:10 <andythenorth_> the first place to set orders is on a vehicle 18:43:14 <Brianetta> no 18:43:27 <Brianetta> you should be able to set orders before you even buy a vehicle 18:43:42 <andythenorth_> the first place to set consist is on a vehicle (currently train only) (in depot) 18:43:49 <andythenorth_> where would be the first place to set livery? 18:43:57 <Brianetta> Same place as orders. 18:43:57 * andythenorth_ suspects on a vehicle 18:44:15 <Brianetta> On the definition of a new service from Little Frimpton to Great Bottomley East. 18:44:27 <Brianetta> To which, vehicles can be added. 18:44:32 <Alberth> depends whether you can have empty groups, I think 18:44:39 <Brianetta> Whyever not? 18:44:45 <andythenorth_> lets have scheme A: things are defined initially on vehicles, groups are another level 18:44:53 <andythenorth_> scheme B: groups first, vehicles second 18:45:05 <Alberth> Brianetta: not sure, but you blindly assume there are, and andy doesn't 18:45:06 <andythenorth_> currently the game is engineered around scheme A 18:45:28 <Brianetta> Simutrans has already solved this problem. 18:45:38 <Brianetta> You can give a schedule to a vehicle ("orders" in TT) 18:45:52 <Brianetta> You can also define a line 18:45:59 <Brianetta> A line is a list of orders 18:46:11 <Brianetta> You can add any vehicle to a line, and it'll follow those orders instead. 18:46:17 <andythenorth_> can you also assign orders individually to a vehicle without it being on a line? 18:46:22 <Brianetta> yes 18:46:23 <Alberth> Simutrans solved *a* problem, I don't know whether they solved ours too 18:46:32 * andythenorth_ begs question 18:46:39 <andythenorth_> why not play simutrans? 18:46:49 <Brianetta> Because its track layout tools suck 18:46:49 * andythenorth_ assumes there's a good reason :) 18:46:52 <Brianetta> You can't make a Y 18:46:59 <Brianetta> A simple junction in track 18:47:02 <Brianetta> it has to be a triangle 18:47:15 <Brianetta> OpenTD is so much better than the orders issue 18:47:25 <Brianetta> Simutrans sucks in so many other ways 18:47:34 <Alberth> Brianetta: so let's make groups better than Simutrans too 18:47:35 <andythenorth_> Brianetta: this isn't an argument by me against your case, there are just lots of wishes for what groups / orders / consists can / should do 18:47:40 <andythenorth_> I'm trying to make sense of them 18:47:42 <Brianetta> this is one tiny aspect wher ethat game mails it, and ours is lost int he deep ocean 18:47:57 <Brianetta> mails? nails 18:48:14 <andythenorth_> someone has to write a non-technical spec for changes, then someone has to make that a technical spec 18:48:24 <ccfreak2k> andythenorth_, wasn't there some kind of recent patch (or maybe it was really old) that basically just catered to as many people as possible because of a lack of a 100% agreeable answer? 18:48:38 <andythenorth_> probably not a good one :P 18:49:02 <andythenorth_> open framework is one thing, design by committee is another 18:49:10 <ccfreak2k> Well I think the underlying problem is that everyone has a different idea on how a complex system should work. 18:49:10 <andythenorth_> :) 18:49:24 <ccfreak2k> Once it's implemented, someone isn't going to like it. 18:49:24 <Brianetta> The biggest hurdle is conservatism 18:49:27 <Alberth> andythenorth_: I think it needs experimentation, making mock-ups, making working prototypes, etc until we find something that works 18:49:31 <Brianetta> Nobody wants the game to be too different 18:49:37 <andythenorth_> I'm with alberth 18:49:44 <Brianetta> and assume that any slightly larger than normal suggestion is a Big Change 18:49:56 <Alberth> Brianetta: as long as you keep the original play style, a change is not problem 18:49:59 <Hirundo> http://pastebin.com/38TSmrD0 <- my 2c 18:50:02 * Terkhen agrees too 18:50:31 <Brianetta> Hirundo: You have restated my original suggestion in ascii art (: 18:50:55 <Brianetta> http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?p=728175&sid=5d7f6d5661cd32305f8c12ae8a218056#p728175 18:51:06 <Hirundo> I have stated here before, that your post could also have been mine :) 18:51:21 <Brianetta> It's been there for two years. I don't expect anybody to implement it, or any other real improvements. 18:52:09 <Alberth> Hirundo: a single hierarchy breaks horribly if you want to do different actions, I think 18:52:21 <Terkhen> I agree on the problem with shared orders, my problem with groups is that making groups is not straightforward and therefore usually not worth it for me 18:52:25 <andythenorth_> Hirundo: so I have city A and city B. I run some passenger trains and mail trains between them. So orders could be on C and consists on D and E? 18:52:53 <Hirundo> If your orders happen to be the same and shared, yes 18:53:01 <andythenorth_> I want all the trains to share orders, but 50% use a pax consist and 50% use a mail consist 18:53:16 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: Understanding dawns. 18:53:27 <Hirundo> Note that I don't have a clear concept of 'consist' in my mind (yet) 18:53:39 <Brianetta> You can even give them colours based on their container, or the parent containers. 18:53:54 <andythenorth_> Brianetta: please don't make the assumption that I don't understand what you wrote. It was *extremely* clear what you intend 18:54:04 <andythenorth_> neither of us are stupid 18:54:14 <Brianetta> It's what simutrans calls a convoy. It's the vehicles that go in to making up a single, orderable unit of transportation. Locomotive and wagins, normally. 18:54:16 <Alberth> Brianetta: a problem with that post is that it posts *the* solution rather than a problem, so it is hard to judge how good the solution is, imho 18:54:25 <andythenorth_> +1 18:54:58 <Brianetta> Alberth: At the time I kind of assumed that the problem was as obvious to others as it was to me. 18:55:11 <planetmaker> :-) seems not 18:55:18 <Eddi|zuHause> that's usually a tricky assumption :p 18:55:18 <Alberth> it never is :) 18:55:20 <Brianetta> The past two years have showed me how hard somebody will work around an issue, and also how attached they become to their work-around. 18:55:28 *** nicfer [~nicfer@190.50.33.196] has joined #openttd 18:55:45 <Alberth> mostly because they don't see that they do a work-around 18:55:53 <Brianetta> There are people who actually believe that the current shared orders "system" is an ideal. 18:56:04 <Alberth> or they lack the power or will to change it 18:56:07 <Brianetta> What I see is something that was crowbarred in. 18:56:39 <Brianetta> Then again, OpenTTD has no design document. 18:56:45 <andythenorth_> so following my example....now I want to replace the engines on *all* my mail trains 18:56:48 <Alberth> Brianetta: if you see the current shared orders as a sort of adding to a group, it is usable 18:56:59 <andythenorth_> but I use the same engines on my passenger trains, but I don't want to replace them 18:57:02 <Brianetta> Alberth: Sort of, yes - but where the hell do I find this group? 18:57:13 <andythenorth_> I have mail trains in group B as well 18:57:14 <Brianetta> And what happens to this group when the trains in it have gone? 18:57:43 <Brianetta> How do I recover my long and complex orders list for the four-train pile-up that was every train in that list? 18:57:53 <Alberth> as always, improvements are incremental, and people stack small changes on top of each other, which gives you the current OpenTTD group/replace/order/??? mess 18:58:00 <Brianetta> Alberth: No, not as always. 18:58:05 <Brianetta> Just as always in this project. 18:58:13 <Brianetta> Improvements can be designed. 18:58:29 <Brianetta> It's just that, with OpenTTD, they never are. 18:58:46 <Brianetta> They're coded, and the code is looked at by maintainers to see if it's worth including. 18:58:53 <Alberth> your post and this discussion is a big change. If you look at suggestions, they are mostly very small 18:59:01 <Brianetta> From brain to code without any readable design. 18:59:17 <Brianetta> It's not big. 18:59:19 <andythenorth_> http://pastebin.com/VWipUkRX 18:59:57 <planetmaker> [21:00] <Brianetta> It's just that, with OpenTTD, they never are. <-- I think you cannot be more wrong 18:59:59 <Alberth> you need several groups next to each other, with different views, imho 19:00:10 <andythenorth_> Alberth: to solve my problem, or the general one? 19:00:29 <Alberth> at least your problem 19:00:32 <andythenorth_> there are two obvious questions in my problem 19:00:37 <andythenorth_> (1) how do I do it now? 19:00:45 <andythenorth_> (2) it doesn't say how consists are defined... 19:00:57 <glx> <TrueBrain> meh! I wish minecarts were stable in Minecraft multiplayer ... /me goes being annoyed <-- and working bucket for lava and water sources 19:00:58 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: Depends what the parent groups are doing. Your diagram doesn't say. 19:01:21 <andythenorth_> C and F define orders 19:01:28 <andythenorth_> they are different ;) 19:01:46 <andythenorth_> currently I use groups to handle this situation 19:02:04 <andythenorth_> I have to move trains into groups, do the replace, then (optionally) I kick them out of the group again 19:02:17 <Brianetta> Feel free to continue doing so. ALthough, really, you don't. Groups only send commands, like stop, or go to depot. 19:02:22 <andythenorth_> if I do that in the hierarchical situation, my orders are lost 19:02:37 <TrueBrain> glx: that works in latest 19:02:49 <Brianetta> Just change the consist of the group. Send to depot for service. Watch account balance drop. 19:03:13 <Brianetta> You need to change two "argon" locos to "xenon" 19:03:16 <andythenorth_> where would consists be defined? 19:03:22 <Brianetta> On the group 19:03:29 <Brianetta> It's a property of teh group 19:03:32 <andythenorth_> on D and G 19:03:33 <Alberth> Brianetta: but you need to change groups D and F, that's a work -around 19:03:36 <Brianetta> yes 19:03:39 <Hirundo> andythenorth_: in a hierarchy, you'd either have to define the order list or the replacement rule twice 19:03:47 <andythenorth_> yes 19:04:08 <Alberth> so you need more hierarchies :) 19:04:11 <Brianetta> Alberth: Explain 19:04:13 <andythenorth_> unless consists exist outside of the hierarchy 19:04:26 <andythenorth_> and if consists exist outside of the hierarchy, why not orders? 19:04:28 <andythenorth_> and liveries? 19:04:43 <Brianetta> He has enough. In his chosen schema, top tier is undefined, second tier is orders, third tier is consist. 19:05:02 <Alberth> Brianetta: you create groups around orders, if I want a different hieracrhy at the same time, eg engine replacement, you cannot do that 19:05:27 <Brianetta> Alberth: I create groups around orders? 19:05:36 <glx> TrueBrain: anyway it will be better with damages :) 19:05:39 <andythenorth_> Alberth you can, but you have to go down each branch until you find each consist 19:05:40 <Alberth> Brianetta: 'lines' than 19:06:01 <andythenorth_> hmm 19:06:08 <Brianetta> However you look at it, you still have less work than you do in OpenTTD as it stands 19:06:09 <andythenorth_> a hierarchy is a form of graph? 19:06:17 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: It's a tree 19:06:26 <andythenorth_> is a tree a graph? 19:06:31 <Brianetta> Folders on your hard disk are a hierarchy 19:06:31 * andythenorth_ is not very good at proper maths 19:06:34 <TrueBrain> glx: very true! 14 more days, sadly enough :( 19:06:40 <Alberth> I'd make a A' next to A and define the replacement there 19:06:44 <andythenorth_> Brianetta: the bits on the disk are *not* a hierarchy ;) 19:06:54 <Hirundo> "a tree is an undirected graph " 19:06:54 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: We don't care; they're abstracted 19:07:05 <Brianetta> ANy more than we care how trains are stored in RAM 19:07:20 <Alberth> andythenorth_: one or more trees with shared leafs? 19:07:25 *** tokai [~tokai@port-92-195-89-186.dynamic.qsc.de] has quit [Quit: c('~' )o] 19:07:26 <andythenorth_> ok 19:07:34 *** pugi [~pugi@p4FCC4C0C.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 19:07:38 <andythenorth_> so if we use a tree, the consist is defined on a per node level 19:07:43 *** tokai [~tokai@port-92-195-89-186.dynamic.qsc.de] has joined #openttd 19:07:46 *** mode/#openttd [+v tokai] by ChanServ 19:07:53 <andythenorth_> instead of nodes that have a relation saying they share a consist? 19:08:00 <Alberth> (sharing nodes seems a bit weird imho) 19:08:07 <andythenorth_> we're defining properties inside the graph, not outside the graph 19:08:35 <Eddi|zuHause> i really don't think we need to insist on a hierarchy/tree... 19:08:48 <andythenorth_> Eddi|zuHause: reasons? 19:08:51 <Alberth> (09:10:02 PM) andythenorth_: instead of nodes that have a relation saying they share a consist? <-- I don't get that 19:08:56 <Brianetta> It's a tree with inheritance. So, think of these groups/lines/whatever as folders. The folder defines properties of any train it contains. If the folder doesn't define something, because it's left blank, the parent folder does. Repeat all the way up to the root folder. 19:09:04 *** IPG [~chatzilla@pool-152-66-222-50.bgk.bme.hu] has joined #openttd 19:09:12 <Eddi|zuHause> since the three prospected properties "order", "consist" and "livery" are completely independent from each other 19:09:19 <andythenorth_> Alberth: if the nodes define the consist, and there are three similar consists, that is defined three times 19:09:25 <Brianetta> Eddi: I don't, either, but andythenorth is asking about that specifically. 19:09:48 <Eddi|zuHause> we only need a way to enforce uniqueness of each property in the "contains" relation 19:09:49 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: Only three! Right now, it's once per vehicle. 19:10:03 <andythenorth_> which is a problem... 19:10:03 <andythenorth_> there should be one consist definition, and each node is marked to say it uses that consist 19:10:06 <Brianetta> Eddi: Take it as read: I agree. 19:10:31 <andythenorth_> * one consist definition per consist :) 19:10:32 *** pugi [~pugi@p4FCC472F.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #openttd 19:10:39 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: You're getting hung up on hierarchy. That's simply one way to ensure that no train can get more than one set of orders. 19:10:41 <Brianetta> There are others. 19:10:44 <Brianetta> They can be ised. 19:10:47 <Brianetta> used. 19:11:31 <Brianetta> Another simple way is to ensure that each vehicle can belong to no more than one group. 19:11:44 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: if you insist on a tree structure, you are bound to run into troubles because when you base your hierarchy on orders, you need to duplicate consists and liveries... this is an exponential growth in the number of properties 19:11:51 <Brianetta> A slightly less simple way is to ensure that no vehicle can belong to more than one group that provides orders 19:12:09 <andythenorth_> Eddi|zuHause: which is why I think a tree structure is a bad way to implement this 19:12:18 <andythenorth_> apparently photoshop keeps application state in the gui :P 19:12:33 <andythenorth_> when they want to know the value of a parameter, they have to go look what the control is set to 19:12:41 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: yes, we seem all to think tree is a bad idea, so we need to think about alternatives 19:12:43 <Brianetta> A preferred way, suggested by Zuu, is that vehicles can belong to an arbitrary number of groups, but they are ordered, and only the first one with orders would apply to the vehicle. 19:12:44 <andythenorth_> which is fun when there are multiple controls for the same property on screen :P 19:12:58 *** Progman [~progman@p57A1BF66.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #openttd 19:14:00 <Brianetta> Zuu's method would require some way to re-order the group membership list of a vehicle. 19:14:00 *** b_jonas [~x@BC24ED22.dsl.pool.telekom.hu] has quit [Quit: leaving] 19:14:16 <andythenorth_> yes 19:14:22 <Brianetta> Or, to have a global precedence, which could be an integer. 19:14:37 <Eddi|zuHause> Brianetta: i'd prefer the global precedence 19:14:49 <Brianetta> Emulatin gthe best parts of the hierarchy solution (the fact that everything has an order). 19:14:51 <andythenorth_> hmm 19:14:59 <Brianetta> Eddi: I quite like it, too 19:14:59 <nicfer> if you force bolt down a shop door, the shopkeeper may be directly angry rather than asking for money? 19:15:04 <nicfer> sorry 19:15:08 <nicfer> wrong channel again 19:15:13 <Brianetta> nicfer: Yes 19:15:16 <Brianetta> He might kill you 19:15:26 <Brianetta> Depends on teh keeper 19:15:30 <Brianetta> Or the RNG's mood 19:15:47 <nicfer> I was going to ask on the #nethack channel 19:15:51 <Brianetta> I thought so (: 19:15:55 <andythenorth_> re-ordering the group membership list of a vehicle on a *per-vehicle* basis would certainly have a few problems :D 19:16:04 <nicfer> sorry for the inconvenance 19:16:08 <Brianetta> No problem 19:16:23 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: it might cause more nightmares than it solves :p 19:16:27 <Brianetta> It'd become an irritating chore 19:16:34 <andythenorth_> you'd need a group to manage the group membership :P 19:16:48 <andythenorth_> we'd be in the same madness we have now, but with a lot more code effort to get there ;) 19:16:57 <andythenorth_> how would global precedence work? 19:17:06 *** lobstar [~michielbi@86.89.201.189] has joined #openttd 19:17:08 <Brianetta> The best solution might be separate precedence indicators for orders, liveries, etc 19:17:21 <andythenorth_> orders, consist, livery 19:17:26 <andythenorth_> anything else we might want to specify? 19:17:36 <Brianetta> 1 == this group has the highest precedence, and any member of this group *will* follow these orders. 19:17:43 <Brianetta> Or have this livery. 19:18:06 <Alberth> assume global precedence is enough for now, we will find out whether it is true 19:18:11 <andythenorth_> servicing interval? 19:18:30 <Brianetta> Alberth: One global precedence number for each definable attribute 19:18:37 <Alberth> sure, no reason to exclude anything imho 19:18:40 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: Sure 19:18:45 *** Singaporekid [~notme@cm4.epsilon84.maxonline.com.sg] has quit [] 19:18:49 <Eddi|zuHause> so, in this instance, groups would work like tags. 19:18:50 <Brianetta> Why don't we knock up a wiki page? 19:18:56 <Alberth> we can always not implement it :) 19:18:58 <andythenorth_> Brianetta: http://wiki.openttd.org/Requested_features/Reworked_groups 19:19:02 <Brianetta> Eddi: Tags with numbers, yes 19:19:21 <Brianetta> A stub! 19:19:24 <Brianetta> That's helpful 19:19:31 <andythenorth_> well we don't the spec yet ;) 19:19:35 * Brianetta rattles in a problem definition 19:19:38 <andythenorth_> feel free to start 19:19:57 <andythenorth_> out of interest, how many livery groups could there reasonably be? 19:20:45 <andythenorth_> I think there are only two answers 19:21:01 * Alberth likes multiple choice :p 19:21:19 <andythenorth_> 16 or n? 19:21:27 <andythenorth_> probably n 19:22:28 <andythenorth_> 'livery group' is misleading 19:22:30 <andythenorth_> but anyway 19:22:42 *** lobstah [~michielbi@86.89.201.189] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 19:23:01 *** JVassie [~James@92.27.149.231] has joined #openttd 19:24:05 * Brianetta is having to fudge about with accounts on openttd.org 19:24:21 <Brianetta> Just groups, surely 19:24:25 <Brianetta> and livery is a possible attribute 19:24:30 <Brianetta> which might not be defined 19:24:50 <andythenorth_> ye 19:24:51 <andythenorth_> s 19:25:04 <andythenorth_> I was thinking of an alternative still....but nvm that for now 19:25:23 <Brianetta> As soon as I get my calidation code I'm going to put some stuf fin there 19:25:36 <Brianetta> perhaps my nails need cutting 19:28:43 <Eddi|zuHause> if you haven't used your accounts in the last 2 years, you might have to merge them first... 19:28:54 <Brianetta> I haven't (: 19:29:02 <Brianetta> I only had the one 19:29:15 <Brianetta> So it's not so much merging as copying 19:29:50 <Brianetta> but the validation code is being retarded by my graylist spam defences 19:30:14 <Brianetta> so I have to wait a minimum of five minute for an email from a new sender 19:30:18 <Eddi|zuHause> if you annoy TrueBrain enough, he might either kick you or help you ;) 19:30:38 <Brianetta> Likely the former, since it's my system 19:32:31 <andythenorth_> so global precedence is similar to css cascade? http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/cascade.html#cascade 19:32:38 <TrueBrain> oeh, I can kick someone? :D 19:32:40 <Brianetta> yes 19:32:45 <Brianetta> TrueBrain: If I can come back (: 19:32:49 <Eddi|zuHause> hm... i have "The Prisoner" [old series from the '60s] here, and am too bored to watch it... 19:32:52 <TrueBrain> depends .. do you smell? 19:32:59 <Brianetta> A bit 19:33:05 <Brianetta> I use my nose for that 19:33:14 <TrueBrain> but wassup? 19:33:51 <Brianetta> Thanks, Rubidium (-: 19:33:59 <Eddi|zuHause> he's merging his accounts and is fighting with his greylist ;) 19:34:09 <andythenorth_> http://www.webteacher.ws/2008/05/19/tip-calculate-the-specificity-of-css-selectors/ 19:34:17 <Brianetta> I'll get the email eventually 19:34:18 <andythenorth_> maybe we write css per train :P 19:34:45 <TrueBrain> nothing we can help anyway 19:35:03 <TrueBrain> Brianetta: but it does mean you have a very poor greylisting, as openttd.org has a (valid, strict) SPF record 19:35:07 <Brianetta> TrueBrain: Indeed. hence, of the two options, it'd be kick 19:35:12 <TrueBrain> I would suggest upgrading :) 19:35:35 <Brianetta> It's postgrey, and I don't use SPF because anybody can make a valid, strict SPF record. 19:35:43 <andythenorth_> Eddi|zuHause: search / filtering for groups....would it be dynamic? i.e. 'vehicles over 20 years', 'vehicles losing money'...? 19:35:51 <andythenorth_> you seemed to think yes earlier? 19:36:04 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, ideally 19:36:07 <TrueBrain> Brianetta: euh ... you can't really fake connection-from in a two-way data stream 19:36:12 <Alberth> if you want to hook autorenew to it, I think so 19:36:13 <Brianetta> Basically, as a newly introduced SMTP server, the mail is delayed until you retransmit, by which time my server has had time to consult updated blacklists. 19:36:18 <TrueBrain> that with strict SPF records, you have a pretty good identification 19:36:26 <andythenorth_> Eddi|zuHause: I was thinking about consists 19:36:35 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: the complexity of this feature may vary 19:36:52 <Rubidium> TrueBrain: I think the point is, that I can still get a domain, give it a strict SPF record and spam everyone 19:36:58 <TrueBrain> so not using SPF 'because anybody can make a calid, strict SPF record' is just saying: I don't use a car, because it drives 19:37:03 <Brianetta> You don't have any identification. You're yet another new mail source. 19:37:07 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: currently, different lists have different filtering abilities 19:37:13 *** Keiya [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has joined #openttd 19:37:16 <Eddi|zuHause> it seems a little inconsistent overall 19:37:19 <andythenorth_> Eddi|zuHause: what if the consists themselves use rules? 19:37:21 <TrueBrain> Rubidium: true; for that we have uceprotect :) 19:37:27 <andythenorth_> just to try another option 19:37:34 * Alberth refuses to bring sugar beet to a green box 19:37:37 <Eddi|zuHause> what do you mean? 19:37:38 <Rubidium> SPF records are only useful to weed out sending from a domain you don't own 19:37:42 <andythenorth_> Alberth: me too oddly 19:37:52 <Eddi|zuHause> for defining consists i'd imagine a depot-like gui 19:37:57 <andythenorth_> Eddi|zuHause: each consist has n slots. For each slot, the vehicle in it is define by rules 19:38:02 <Eddi|zuHause> where you set engines, wagons and refits 19:38:04 <TrueBrain> Rubidium: we accept all mails from SPF valid domains, given they are not in uceprotect 19:38:09 <Eddi|zuHause> without actually buying the vehicles 19:38:13 <andythenorth_> Eddi|zuHause: that's the obvious route :) 19:38:14 <TrueBrain> so far, it has not given a single spam message :) 19:38:23 <TrueBrain> (in other words: greylist is skipped when SPF is valid, and uceprotect validates) 19:38:30 <andythenorth_> what about the vehicle in each slot of the consist being determined by a decision tree of some kind? 19:38:38 <TrueBrain> even works correct with google :D 19:38:55 <andythenorth_> so 'if engine in slot 1 is more than 20 years old, change it for this type'? 19:39:00 <andythenorth_> etc 19:39:06 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: yes, but you need to evaluate these decisions on train construction. and then on what criteria? 19:39:20 <andythenorth_> player has to create rules :P 19:39:22 <andythenorth_> tedious 19:39:28 <andythenorth_> I'm just fooling around with options 19:39:48 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: the more complex you define this feature, the less likely it will get implemented 19:40:06 <andythenorth_> obviously :) 19:40:15 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: in the most evil case, the consist would contain "wagon slots", and the wagons are attached at the station 19:40:16 <andythenorth_> so it's good to rule out complex stuff explicitly no? 19:40:20 <andythenorth_> ha 19:40:35 <andythenorth_> 'if cargo B is waiting at station xyz, use wagon type pdq in this slot' 19:40:42 <andythenorth_> hmm 19:40:48 <andythenorth_> very railroad tycoon :) 19:41:09 <andythenorth_> and in RT3 the game had a despatcher who sorted the consists out automatically based on cargo prices 19:41:21 <andythenorth_> leaving the player alone to build industries, which is the proper function of a transport game :P 19:41:27 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: the 3 minutes that i played rrt2, i had the feeling empty wagons would just magically hop back to the source 19:41:32 <andythenorth_> they do 19:41:34 <Eddi|zuHause> that should not happen 19:41:42 <andythenorth_> a bit like 20 tile trains magically fit into depots :P 19:42:01 <Eddi|zuHause> a bit like rondje om de kerk AI :p 19:42:12 <andythenorth_> RT3 makes more sense in terms of bills of lading or whatever, rather than actual trains 19:42:16 <Eddi|zuHause> no. i think that is bad 19:42:35 <andythenorth_> ok, so consists are just simple drag and drop, but on a virtual train somewhere 19:42:43 <Eddi|zuHause> part of the logistics is managing empty wagons get back to where they need to be loaded 19:42:48 <andythenorth_> so consists could be defined on a pool of hidden / virtual trains? 19:42:57 <Eddi|zuHause> yes 19:43:06 <andythenorth_> so all dragging, newgrf complexity etc would be handled by this 19:43:14 <andythenorth_> as it's just a copy of what exists 19:43:19 <Eddi|zuHause> but that is probably a too technical design decision which should not be made in this early design state 19:43:28 <andythenorth_> yeah ok 19:44:32 <Eddi|zuHause> as a mini feature: a setting that defines whether changed consists leave old vehicles behind in the depot, or sell them. 19:44:32 *** fanioz [~fanioz@223.255.225.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 19:45:02 <andythenorth_> what's the purpose of leaving them behind? 19:45:24 <Eddi|zuHause> degrading the probably still good high speed engines to regional service 19:45:33 <Eddi|zuHause> when switching to better high speed engines 19:45:40 <andythenorth_> if the vehicles for a consist change are in depot when a train enters it, it uses them in preference to new ones? 19:45:48 <andythenorth_> or player does it manually? 19:46:02 <Eddi|zuHause> if the vehicles are in the depot, reuse them. yes 19:46:28 <andythenorth_> what if the vehicles could have a different group applied by the consist change? 19:46:47 <andythenorth_> 'goto depot and apply groups xyz' 19:46:57 <andythenorth_> that would be bonkers but plausible, 19:47:00 <Eddi|zuHause> the groups are discarded 19:47:12 <andythenorth_> you could have vehicles going around automatically switching which orders they're using :o 19:48:30 <andythenorth_> Eddi|zuHause: so you want to cascade loco type A down to 'regional service' from 'fast service'. You just change the group surely, and it picks up new orders? 19:48:32 <Eddi|zuHause> depot based shunting :) 19:48:38 *** HerzogDeXtEr [~Flex@89.246.163.220] has joined #openttd 19:49:02 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: example: 19:49:09 <andythenorth_> I guess switching orders leaves the wagons on the wrong train 19:49:22 <Eddi|zuHause> i have two groups, an express group and a regional group, each having a consist assigned 19:49:57 <Eddi|zuHause> in the express consist, i replace BR 110 by BR 103. the trains go to depot, buy a BR 103 and leave the BR 110 behind 19:50:08 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: http://wiki.openttd.org/Requested_features/Reworked_groups 19:50:26 <andythenorth_> then you send the regional group to depot to swap out to the BR 110, selling whatever they are using 19:50:36 <andythenorth_> assuming they go to the right depot :P 19:50:46 <Eddi|zuHause> then in the regional consist, the trains are ordered to go to depot, and switch their engine with a BR 110 if one is available in the depot 19:51:13 <Eddi|zuHause> possibly with a setting to buy a new one, or to just do nothing 19:51:43 <andythenorth_> works brilliantly if you have limited number of depots :) 19:52:21 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, but the less depots you have, the more urgently you need a conditional "how to get to the depot" path in each order 19:52:33 <andythenorth_> yes 19:52:47 *** asnoehu [~thok@524B7349.cm-4-4b.dynamic.ziggo.nl] has joined #openttd 19:52:51 <andythenorth_> differentiate 'main' depot and 'servicing' depots? 19:52:52 <andythenorth_> nah 19:53:23 <andythenorth_> I am making the assumption that current 'goto depot and refit' order would be upgraded to 'goto depot and use consist' 19:53:24 <Alberth> not everybody connects all lines to each other :p 19:53:29 <Eddi|zuHause> that could be as simple as extending the "if needs servicing" conditional order with a "if needs autoreplace" 19:53:50 <andythenorth_> 'if needs autoreplace goto Zurich Depot 1' 19:53:51 <andythenorth_> etc 19:54:25 <andythenorth_> hmm 19:54:46 <Alberth> doesn't sound like a regular order-ish thing to me, at first read 19:54:57 <andythenorth_> if 'goto depot and use consist' was available (it should be), then that's approximately the same behaviour as RT3 :P 19:55:07 <Alberth> perhaps autoreplace is a form of servicing? 19:55:13 <andythenorth_> I can just constantly sell and buy vehicles 19:55:40 <Alberth> like rondje om de kerk ? 19:55:51 *** andythenorth_ [~andy@host217-43-130-207.range217-43.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 19:56:15 *** andythenorth_ [~andy@host217-43-130-207.range217-43.btcentralplus.com] has joined #openttd 19:56:24 <Alberth> like rondje om de kerk ? 19:56:58 <andythenorth_> Brianetta: wiki page looks good 19:58:57 <Brianetta> ta 19:59:02 * Brianetta is still typing away 19:59:02 *** Mucht [~Martin@chello084115143107.3.graz.surfer.at] has joined #openttd 19:59:04 <andythenorth_> hmm 19:59:14 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: http://www.simutrans-germany.com/wiki/wiki/tiki-index.php?page=en_LineManagement&highlight=line 19:59:22 <andythenorth_> is there any case for train to change livery as part of orders 19:59:28 <andythenorth_> I can't think of one, but just checking... 19:59:37 <Brianetta> Yes 19:59:46 <Brianetta> well, for a group to have both orders and livery 20:00:00 <andythenorth_> I mean 'goto A and be red, goto B and be blue' 20:00:04 <Brianetta> Say you have a train that you want to run the Orient Express 20:00:10 <Brianetta> You want its lovery and schedule 20:00:17 <Brianetta> oh, no 20:00:26 <Brianetta> vehicles don't do that until 2070 at the earliest 20:00:38 <andythenorth_> what about 'goto depot and be repainted' :P 20:00:41 * andythenorth_ thinks not 20:00:46 <Brianetta> IRL that's costly 20:00:54 <Brianetta> so I don' think it should be encouraged 20:00:59 <Brianetta> it'd just be eye candy 20:01:33 <andythenorth_> servicing interval same - no reason for orders to change it 20:01:37 <Brianetta> Some vehicles let you see if they're carrying cargo or are empty, which would be the main benefit 20:01:42 <Brianetta> no, no reason 20:02:10 <Brianetta> Feel free to add these to the "The problem" section 20:02:19 <Brianetta> I'm editing "The Solutions" atm 20:03:20 * andythenorth_ still wonders if orders can be changed by orders :P 20:03:33 *** Zuu_ [~Zuu@2.68.29.210] has joined #openttd 20:03:46 <Brianetta> That's pretty high level 20:03:50 <Brianetta> re Zuu 20:04:46 <andythenorth_> if orders could change group (go to x and change group), then livery, servicing, orders, consist etc could all be changed by orders 20:04:50 <andythenorth_> mad but it would work 20:05:00 * andythenorth_ wonders if we could programme emergent behaviour that way 20:05:49 <Terkhen> I don't know, but madness would emerge for sure 20:06:16 * andythenorth_ wonders if we could programme prisoners dilemma with it 20:06:39 <andythenorth_> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation 20:07:47 <andythenorth_> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation#Axelrod.27s_Tournaments 20:10:07 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, instead of current refit orders, you'd give a change group order to change the consist 20:10:10 *** Zuu [~Zuu@2.70.21.125] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 20:11:10 <Eddi|zuHause> "load at A" - "unload at B" - "change consist to X" - "service at depot" - "load at B" - "unload at A" - "change consist to Y" - "service at depot" [repeat] 20:11:50 <andythenorth_> better than the current refit option 20:11:56 <andythenorth_> who uses the current refit option? 20:12:00 <Eddi|zuHause> might want to combine to "change group and go servicing" 20:17:13 *** De_Ghosty [~s@206-248-156-132.dsl.teksavvy.com] has joined #openttd 20:17:20 <Alberth> good night 20:17:42 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: Review page please? 20:17:50 <Zuu_> Brianetta: level as in? 20:18:20 *** Zuu_ is now known as Zuu 20:18:57 *** Alberth [~hat@a82-95-164-127.adsl.xs4all.nl] has left #openttd [] 20:19:01 <Brianetta> ZuuL: Programming 20:21:11 <V453000> <andythenorth_> who uses the current refit option? <- I do 20:21:12 <V453000> a lot 20:21:38 <Eddi|zuHause> the usefulness of that option depends drastically on the used newgrf set 20:21:52 <V453000> indeed 20:21:59 <Eddi|zuHause> with the proposed consist system, that would be also possible with default vehicles 20:23:56 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: I'm done with that page for now. Feel free to throw your say in there. 20:25:07 * andythenorth_ ponders 20:25:15 <andythenorth_> not to get stuck on implementation but... 20:25:30 <andythenorth_> Eddi|zuHause: if consists *were* defined by a pool of virtual/hidden trains.... 20:25:36 <andythenorth_> ...orders could be done the same way? 20:25:52 <andythenorth_> forget all discussion of groups for a minute or two 20:25:55 <Eddi|zuHause> there is already an order pool 20:26:20 <Brianetta> Of course they could. You can do that already in the game, if you have the cash and consider a depot full of trains to be virtual/hidden 20:26:20 <andythenorth_> is it persistent beyond the removal of the last vehicle in the pool? 20:26:47 <Eddi|zuHause> no, but that is only because they are explicitly deleted 20:27:08 <Eddi|zuHause> if the orders were "posessed" by a group, they would be deleted when the group is deleted 20:27:23 <Eddi|zuHause> but they'd stay intact if the group has no vehicles in it 20:27:52 <Eddi|zuHause> that change should be one of the easiest 20:29:02 <andythenorth_> for the sake of arguing can we call these 'master vehicles'? 20:29:14 <andythenorth_> and assume vehicles are slaved to a master vehicle for various properties... 20:29:17 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: yexo * r20979 /trunk/src/newgrf.cpp: -Fix: [NewGRF] ignore the variable for action7/9 condition type 0x0D and 0x0E as documented 20:29:49 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth_: that is pretty much how it's done currently 20:29:54 <andythenorth_> hmm 20:30:08 <andythenorth_> seems to be a pattern. we have a web app that is similar 20:30:34 <andythenorth_> so livery and servicing interval could also be slaved to a master vehicle 20:30:58 * Rubidium likes that idea 20:31:10 <Rubidium> yay memory usage reduction! :) 20:31:26 <andythenorth_> really? 20:31:34 <andythenorth_> lots of master vehicles :P 20:31:50 <Brianetta> Rubidium: We've got that group thing on the wiki now 20:32:23 <andythenorth_> seems like memory gobbling to me, especially if master vehicles persist for whole game once created 20:32:56 <andythenorth_> I guess properties on slave vehicles would use a pointer to master, instead of storing actual props? 20:33:00 <Terkhen> slave vehicles could just have a pointer to the master for shared properties 20:33:01 <Brianetta> Ooh, I just got my validation code (-: 20:33:24 <andythenorth_> so change props just means change pointer? 20:33:26 <andythenorth_> except for consist 20:33:42 *** frosch123 [~frosch@frnk-590f7232.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:34:49 <andythenorth_> so then there are two ways of doing stuff with vehicles. 20:35:05 <andythenorth_> 1. build new vehicle, choose which master vehicles to slave to for each property 20:35:12 <andythenorth_> 2. pick a slave vehicle and clone it 20:35:27 <andythenorth_> or clone some aspects of it 20:35:33 <andythenorth_> not sure how the gui would work 20:38:06 <Brianetta> It would hide that virtual vehicle 20:38:48 <Brianetta> The window for that virtual vehicle would be the window containing the real vehicles to which it is linked 20:39:05 <Brianetta> and would have appropriate furniture for consist modiification, etc 20:39:39 <Brianetta> Perhaps the same furniture, within reason - icons down the right. 20:40:22 <nicfer> grass and rainforest is different to distinguish from, without trees 20:42:57 <andythenorth_> hmm 20:43:05 * andythenorth_ once read about pointers 20:43:24 <andythenorth_> for some properties, a master vehicle could have a pointer to another master vehicle? 20:44:54 <Brianetta> global precedence! 20:45:15 <Brianetta> Link a vehicle to a bunch of virtual vehicles and let them fight by precedence. 20:45:36 <Brianetta> master vehicle == group 20:45:44 <Brianetta> it's just a record in memory, after all 20:45:46 <andythenorth_> pretty much 20:45:57 <Brianetta> This is just implementation. 20:46:17 <Brianetta> It certainly could be done that way, and if the devs find it easiest, let them do that. 20:46:26 <andythenorth_> this is fine for vehicle properties 20:46:39 <andythenorth_> but not for things that aren't mutable properties :o 20:47:04 <andythenorth_> however, selecting what's in a group is probably different to using groups to define certain properties 20:47:05 <Brianetta> Which are? 20:47:21 <andythenorth_> profits, age, reliability 20:47:28 <andythenorth_> capacity 20:47:31 <Brianetta> They can be ignored. 20:47:31 <andythenorth_> max speed 20:47:34 <andythenorth_> timetable lateness 20:47:49 <Brianetta> Your virtual train is going to be, basically, a template 20:47:54 <andythenorth_> yes 20:48:02 <andythenorth_> but I don't think it covers 100% of what groups should do 20:48:06 <Brianetta> so those immutable fields can be masked out 20:48:20 <Brianetta> Well, probably not. 20:48:35 <andythenorth_> each group gets the mutable properties from a master vehicle 20:48:42 <andythenorth_> or leaves them unchanged 20:48:53 <Brianetta> I'd have thought that making explicit records for groups, such as a livery definition, an orders sheet, a template consist, etc 20:49:28 <Brianetta> I don't believe that vehicles currently have their own livery record 20:49:31 <andythenorth_> no 20:49:34 <Brianetta> unless it's changed recently 20:49:34 <andythenorth_> probably not 20:49:56 <andythenorth_> although colour map can be set by newgrf, so the structure is probably there 20:49:58 <Brianetta> and orders sheets are separate 20:50:19 <Brianetta> They can already be linked to a vehicle 20:50:39 <Brianetta> so that's trivial; link one to a group, and link it to each vehicle that joins 20:50:47 <Brianetta> and wipe the orders of any vehicle that leaves 20:51:06 <Brianetta> which is what shared orders does right now 20:51:23 * andythenorth_ thinks 20:51:49 <Brianetta> make the orders persist for as long as the group does 20:51:57 <Brianetta> *maybe* also for as long as the trains 20:52:09 <Brianetta> if you want complete compatibility with today's brain-dead system (: 20:52:29 <Brianetta> delete a group, and it reverts to shared orders 20:52:38 <andythenorth_> if I'm setting orders for a group, I can choose to use another group as the source of the orders? 20:52:46 <andythenorth_> or set the orders explicitly 20:52:47 <Brianetta> sure 20:52:50 <andythenorth_> ok 20:53:02 <Brianetta> you might even be able to share the orders with another group; depends how pure we wan tthis 20:53:19 <andythenorth_> it would be cleaner to use another group 20:53:22 <Brianetta> Personally, I think that shouldn't be encouraged 20:53:27 <Brianetta> yes 20:53:32 <andythenorth_> or you end up with the shared order system, but just moved up to group level 20:53:40 <andythenorth_> same problem 20:54:12 <andythenorth_> so a train has orders 20:54:15 <Brianetta> In fact, if you wanted to just use that as a system (join adds shared orders, leave wipes them) then which ever group a vehicle joined last would define the orders 20:54:21 <Brianetta> erasing the ambiguity problem 20:54:57 <andythenorth_> talking implementation is dangerous, but whatever... 20:55:05 <Brianetta> although I do think that there should be a *strong* link between group membership and orders 20:55:06 <andythenorth_> a train has a pointer for orders 20:55:13 <andythenorth_> the pointer goes to a master vehicle, or a group 20:55:23 <Brianetta> yes 20:55:26 <andythenorth_> if a group, the group gets orders from a master vehicle, or another group 20:55:26 <Brianetta> which might be the same thing 20:55:52 <andythenorth_> if the group has a pointer to a group which recurses back to the first group, crash the game 20:55:52 <Brianetta> Are you talking nested groups? 20:55:55 <andythenorth_> no 20:56:00 <andythenorth_> forget hierarchy 20:56:04 <Brianetta> Copied orders? 20:56:06 <andythenorth_> no 20:56:14 <Brianetta> I'm not talking about hierarchy, just groups containing groups 20:56:36 <Brianetta> why would a group get its orders from another group? 20:56:42 <andythenorth_> because it can 20:56:56 <Brianetta> So two groups would share orders? 20:56:59 <andythenorth_> yes 20:57:04 * Brianetta shudders 20:57:05 <andythenorth_> if a player wanted to 20:57:22 <Brianetta> You know what I'd prefer? 20:57:43 <Brianetta> One big group containing all the vehicles which need those orders. 20:58:20 <Brianetta> Shared orders has comprehension issues. 20:58:44 <Brianetta> It needs to be obvious which vehicles share orders, and why, and how that's controlled. 20:58:58 <Brianetta> Which, why and how should all be "because of the group" 21:00:22 <planetmaker> Brianetta: phrasing it that way, it's simply a matter of renaming 'shared orders' to 'group orders' and it's done 21:00:37 <Brianetta> planetmaker: Nope; there's no "obvious" 21:00:43 *** dfox [~dfox@ip-89-176-209-74.net.upcbroadband.cz] has joined #openttd 21:00:50 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: rubidium * r20980 /trunk/readme.txt: -Change: some tweaking of the readme about grfcodec/nforenum and linking to a more clear opengfx/opensfx/openmsx download page 21:01:02 <Brianetta> planetmaker: http://wiki.openttd.org/Requested_features/Reworked_groups 21:01:16 <Brianetta> I've bulleted why it's not the same thing in the first section 21:01:43 * andythenorth_ knows that the pointers suggestion smells right, but doesn't know why 21:02:25 <andythenorth_> vehicle has pointer to master vehicle. Master vehicle may have orders, or a pointer to another master vehicle 21:02:43 * Brianetta doesn't care, as long as all that's hidden from the player behind a usable interface 21:03:11 <Brianetta> It doesn't have a pointer to another master vehicle 21:03:26 <Brianetta> otherwise, if you sell the right vehicle, the other trains lose thier orders 21:03:34 <andythenorth_> ?? 21:03:47 <andythenorth_> master vehicles aren't real ;) 21:03:47 <Brianetta> Since this demonstrably does not happen, we can assume they just have pointers to the same orders, somewhere in memory 21:04:00 <andythenorth_> yeah 21:04:13 <Brianetta> then there's no reason at all to complicate things be pointing them at each other 21:04:50 <andythenorth_> I think the issue comes somewhere else than orders 21:04:55 <andythenorth_> I'm not sure, let me think 21:05:09 <Brianetta> We just need a custom struct on a group 21:05:36 <Brianetta> which contains everything we want to happen to member vehicles, and to which some of their own properties can point 21:05:56 <andythenorth_> no there's a reason that won't work, I just can't find the words for it yet :D 21:06:00 <Brianetta> such as orders, service interval and livery 21:06:08 <andythenorth_> hmm 21:06:11 <andythenorth_> maybe it wil 21:06:13 <andythenorth_> will /s 21:06:13 <Brianetta> whereas consist would be handled at the next visit to a depot, funds permitting 21:06:43 <Brianetta> and would only need a list of stock, not a complete instantiation of a vehicle. 21:06:57 <Wolf01> 'nighty night 21:07:01 *** Wolf01 [~wolf01@host253-232-dynamic.9-87-r.retail.telecomitalia.it] has quit [Quit: Once again the world is quick to bury me.] 21:10:51 <andythenorth_> Brianetta: I have vehicle group 1, with order set A. I have vehicle group 2, with order set B. 21:10:51 <andythenorth_> I want all vehicles in group 1 and group 2 to share livery. 21:11:01 <andythenorth_> I can set livery on group 1 and group 2 separately 21:11:08 <andythenorth_> I can put all vehicles in a new group manually 21:11:22 <andythenorth_> or I can point livery property of group 1 and group 2 at another group (group 3) 21:11:25 <andythenorth_> which is better? 21:16:02 <andythenorth_> Eddi|zuHause: any group could set a property explicitly, or choose to inherit it from another group? 21:16:30 <Brianetta> andythenorth_: Adding groups 1 and 2 to 3. This action should add the groups' members only. 21:17:15 <andythenorth_> does that merge groups 1 and 2? 21:17:23 <andythenorth_> i.e. are they removed? 21:17:25 <Brianetta> no 21:17:32 <Brianetta> it copies their membership 21:17:50 <andythenorth_> ok 21:18:07 <andythenorth_> if I add a new vehicle to group 1... 21:18:14 <andythenorth_> I have to also add it to group 3 21:18:40 <andythenorth_> or...? 21:18:51 <Brianetta> yes, you would 21:18:56 <Brianetta> think of it like MP3 playlists 21:19:04 <Brianetta> you can add several lists, then save as a new list 21:19:09 <Brianetta> but there's no link created 21:19:56 <Brianetta> so, in your group editor, you can add new vehicles, and from the add windows, you can choose vehicles or groups 21:20:06 <Brianetta> from a group, you can add vehicles, or "all vehicles" 21:20:13 <andythenorth_> what about... 21:20:27 <andythenorth_> ...I clone a vehicle in group 1, and because the vehicle is also in group 3, it's added to both? 21:20:31 <andythenorth_> that seems sane 21:20:34 <Brianetta> yes 21:20:43 <Brianetta> group membership is a cloneable attribute 21:20:50 <andythenorth_> so cloning a vehicle also clones all of it's group memberships 21:20:53 <Brianetta> yes 21:21:04 <Brianetta> same as it does share orders right now 21:21:07 <andythenorth_> but building a new vehicle manually requires manual group work 21:21:12 <Brianetta> yes 21:21:17 <Brianetta> again, as it does now 21:21:30 <andythenorth_> yes 21:21:40 <Brianetta> although joining the groups of another vehicle is an option to consider 21:22:08 <Brianetta> in reality, though, to how many groups will a single vehicle belong? 21:22:19 <Brianetta> It's not likely to be that difficult to manage as a one-off 21:22:21 <andythenorth_> depends on the imagination and other tendencies of the player 21:22:26 <Brianetta> especially since cloning is still an option 21:22:51 <andythenorth_> I prefer the logic of groups inheriting, but not the GUI for it 21:22:56 <Brianetta> groups as tag lists is a good analogy 21:23:10 <Brianetta> groups inheriting implied groups containing groups 21:23:15 <andythenorth_> nah 21:23:25 <andythenorth_> groups containing pointers to other groups 21:23:33 <Brianetta> not necessarily as a hierarchy, but controls against being a member of a child group must be in place 21:23:40 <andythenorth_> why? 21:23:47 <Brianetta> those pointers need to be absolutely clear to the player 21:24:00 <Brianetta> there should be no question whatever about what that relationship is, and how to change it 21:24:27 <Brianetta> If your group is a member of its child, which one's ultimately responsible for an attribute? 21:24:42 <Brianetta> bearing in mind that the child is now your parent 21:24:48 <andythenorth_> a group wouldn't have children 21:24:52 <Brianetta> it would 21:25:09 <Brianetta> They're defined as any groups which are members of a group 21:25:16 <andythenorth_> it would look like a tree per property, not per group 21:25:37 <Brianetta> The UI for that would be frightening 21:25:43 <andythenorth_> maybe 21:25:51 <andythenorth_> quite possibly 21:26:07 <Brianetta> is it necessary? 21:26:12 <andythenorth_> not sure 21:26:29 <andythenorth_> I probably wouldn't use it 21:26:33 <andythenorth_> but some people probably would 21:26:45 <andythenorth_> it addresses the 'rainbow routes' use case quite well 21:26:47 <Brianetta> Somebody will use any feature you add 21:26:56 <Brianetta> ellucidate on that 21:27:02 <dihedral> night 21:27:05 <andythenorth_> group 1 defines orders A 21:27:07 <Brianetta> night, dihedral 21:27:11 <andythenorth_> group 2 defines orders B 21:27:16 <andythenorth_> group 3 defines only livery 21:27:30 <andythenorth_> group 1 and 2 have their livery set to 'inherit from group 3' 21:27:42 <Brianetta> sure; it's not an awful lot more complicated to use tag soup, though 21:27:56 <Brianetta> un-nested groups act just like tags 21:28:20 <andythenorth_> depends if you can have an arbitrary number of tags or not 21:28:27 <Brianetta> well, I'd hope so 21:28:33 <Brianetta> why limit it? 21:29:05 <andythenorth_> un-nested groups ~= tags 21:29:08 <andythenorth_> I agree 21:29:16 <andythenorth_> are there ways in which they'd differ? 21:29:25 <Brianetta> not greatly 21:29:39 <Brianetta> My photo manager uses tags, and they manifest as groups 21:30:25 <andythenorth_> yup 21:30:57 <andythenorth_> does it organise photos adequately? 21:31:38 <Brianetta> not really, but that's because it's a work in progress (Yorba Shotwell). I used to use F-Spot, which has the same tagging, but a better search interface. It's excellent, except for the random crashes. 21:31:58 <Brianetta> In another few weeks, it'll be ready. 21:33:00 *** KouDy [~KouDy@ip-89-176-97-213.net.upcbroadband.cz] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 21:33:19 <andythenorth_> groups inheriting is probably smarter for those that need it 21:33:22 <andythenorth_> but anyway 21:33:29 <Brianetta> sure 21:33:33 <andythenorth_> neither of us is going to implement this right? 21:33:38 <Brianetta> as long as there's some check against circular references 21:33:55 <andythenorth_> I think circular pointers crash the game? 21:34:02 <andythenorth_> that sorts it out 21:34:07 <Brianetta> Yes. That's a Bad Thing. 21:34:20 <andythenorth_> otherwise yes, it's a tricky GUI problem 21:34:27 <andythenorth_> greying out one menu choice is easy 21:34:31 <Brianetta> I won't be implementing it, but that's because I don't contribute code to OpenTTD. 21:34:37 *** Fast2 [~Fast2@p57AF952A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 21:34:40 <andythenorth_> greying out lots according to the pointer chain is horrible 21:34:44 <andythenorth_> if even possible 21:34:59 <Brianetta> Creating a precedence integer could solve it, but it's unpredictable 21:35:06 <andythenorth_> if neither of us is going to implement, that's enough theory for one day :P 21:35:27 <andythenorth_> bed time! 21:35:31 <Brianetta> night 21:35:40 <andythenorth_> good night 21:36:10 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: orudge * r20981 /trunk/src/lang/english.txt: -Fix: British English uses 'centre', not 'center' 21:38:18 *** last_evolution [~last_evol@ip-86-49-60-58.net.upcbroadband.cz] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 21:40:47 *** Fast2 [~Fast2@p57AF952A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #openttd 21:42:10 *** andythenorth_ [~andy@host217-43-130-207.range217-43.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Quit: andythenorth_] 21:47:58 <Terkhen> good night 21:48:37 <Rubidium> sweet dreams 21:49:48 *** fonsinchen [~fonsinche@brln-4db80fec.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #openttd 21:54:17 *** Fast2 [~Fast2@p57AF952A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 21:55:22 *** Zuu [~Zuu@2.68.29.210] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 22:01:36 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: orudge * r20982 /trunk/ (readme.txt src/lang/english.txt): -Change: Don't refer to OpenTTD as a "clone" any more 22:01:54 <SpComb> har har 22:02:00 <SpComb> how long since orudge last commited? 22:02:52 <Rubidium> half an hour? 22:03:04 <SpComb> true 22:03:31 <Rubidium> or did you mean the 9 months and 20 days gap 22:03:39 <SpComb> yes 22:03:46 <SpComb> r20981 | orudge | 2010-10-18 00:37:27 +0300 (Mon, 18 Oct 2010) | 1 line 22:03:46 <SpComb> r18662 | orudge | 2009-12-30 04:23:10 +0200 (Wed, 30 Dec 2009) | 1 line 22:05:47 <Rubidium> wow... an ICU 4.4.2 release. They usually don't get any further than .1 22:06:09 *** Adambean [AdamR@82.hosts.reece-eu.net] has quit [Quit: Gone fishing] 22:06:27 <Rubidium> last x.y.2 was 2.6.2 in 2004 22:07:02 *** George|2 [~George@212.113.107.39] has joined #openttd 22:07:03 *** George is now known as Guest3097 22:07:03 *** George|2 is now known as George 22:07:07 <__ln__> orudge: you changed the text but not the id... does that mean other languages will not automatically get updated? 22:07:37 <Rubidium> maybe now ICU 4.4 compiles on Windows :) 22:09:50 *** ar3k [~ident@87-239-75-101.internetia.net.pl] has quit [Quit: âI-n-v-i-s-i-o-nâ 3.2 (July '10)] 22:12:31 <Yexo> __ln__: the string is marked in wt3 as "English string was changed" 22:13:57 *** Guest3097 [~George@212.113.107.39] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 22:14:16 <glx> there is "string needing validation" in dropdown :) 22:14:25 *** fonsinchen [~fonsinche@brln-4db80fec.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 22:15:09 <orudge> SpComb: I tend to try to commit something at least once a year 22:16:04 * SpComb commits something 22:16:05 <orudge> __ln__: I have no idea. Does the webtranslator not pick up that there's a difference and show it to the translators? 22:16:17 <SpComb> to the ttdpatch svn repo! Since I actually have commit access there! 22:16:21 <orudge> heh 22:16:46 * SpComb thumbnose 22:17:09 <orudge> I have commit access there too, I do believe 22:17:18 <orudge> and if not, I host it, so that can be easily rectified 22:17:25 <orudge> not that I have anything to commit... 22:19:17 <Rubidium> orudge: the webtranslator has marked the changed strings as "needing validation", which are listed after the "untranslated" strings 22:20:29 <Rubidium> so in order of importance for showing first (the next is only chosen if the previous lists are empty): "untranslated", "needing validation", "all strings" 22:21:15 <Rubidium> oh, "needing validation" is actually the first in the order of importance 22:22:17 *** nicfer [~nicfer@190.50.33.196] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 22:22:34 *** xiong [~xiong@netblock-68-183-253-72.dslextreme.com] has joined #openttd 22:22:43 <__ln__> okay then 22:26:43 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: orudge * r20983 /extra/website/ (3 files in 2 dirs): [Website] -Change: Don't refer to OpenTTD as a clone 22:28:25 *** Keiya [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 22:29:00 *** Keiya_ [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has joined #openttd 22:32:57 *** Roberto [~Roberto@cpc2-hawk1-0-0-cust669.aztw.cable.virginmedia.com] has joined #openttd 22:34:25 <Roberto> hi can any one help me? 22:34:45 <avdg> whats the problem? 22:36:07 <Roberto> i have a server running by adding -D onto the target sortcut.. thats all working fine people can join etc.. but when i do a console command e.g. "rcon password reset_client 6 it just says in blue the format ? it don't work i have tryed otherways but it just says error. 22:37:16 <glx> add quotes around the command 22:37:28 <Roberto> what like "? 22:37:31 <glx> rcon password "command args" 22:37:36 <Roberto> i'll try that 22:38:13 <Roberto> no don't work 22:38:17 <__ln__> glx: can i ask a question about the fullscreen mode on windows? 22:38:36 <glx> what's wrong with fullscreen ? 22:39:00 <xiong> Horses come in three colors! 22:39:46 <Yexo> Roberto: "don't work" is the most vague description you can give 22:40:03 <Yexo> what doesn't work? Do you get an error message (if so, copy-paste it here)? 22:40:09 <__ln__> glx: the fact that after I press alt-enter, i regret i just did that. the taskbar gets messed up because the screen's resolution shrinks to something ridiculously small. and color palette is messed up on the second screen. 22:40:22 <Yexo> if not, what did you try exactly and what did you expect to happen? 22:40:25 <glx> alt-enter is a standard shortcut on windows 22:40:43 <__ln__> glx: it's not the shortcut that bothers me :) 22:41:06 <glx> and fullscreen uses current resolution 22:41:11 <Yexo> __ln__: have you tried a 32bpp blitter? 22:41:23 <__ln__> Yexo: nope 22:41:25 <glx> if the window is 800*600, fullscreen will be 800*600 22:41:35 <glx> same for other OS 22:41:51 <__ln__> glx: does that make any sense in the era of LCD screens that have one native resolution? 22:42:18 <glx> it's not windows specific 22:42:24 <__ln__> still 22:42:46 <__ln__> (there's a patch for separating window and fullscreen solutions in FS, btw) 22:42:49 <GhostlyDeath> __ln__: X11? 22:43:00 <Roberto> @ Yexo When i type = rcon password "reset_company 4" it says under it -remove an idle company from the game. usage:' reset_company <company-id>' in lught blue also has another line where to find the ID 22:43:30 <__ln__> glx: but could the fullscreen be implemented as a borderless window that is the size of the current screen? 22:43:49 <GhostlyDeath> X11? 22:44:02 <GhostlyDeath> Windows? 22:44:24 <__ln__> GhostlyDeath: please read what i said in the first place. 22:44:34 <GhostlyDeath> __ln__: I just came from home from work 22:44:39 <Yexo> Roberto: there are only 2 blue lines? not a red line above those? 22:44:46 <GhostlyDeath> I do not know the time at which your question starts 22:45:05 <Roberto> no just 22:45:20 <GhostlyDeath> OpenTTD uses SDL 22:45:25 <GhostlyDeath> You'd have to change SDL 22:45:43 <GhostlyDeath> Or change OpenTTD to use SDL differently 22:45:44 <Roberto> my command i put in "yellow" and 2 lines under it after i hit enter in "light blue" that is info? that don't even help lol 22:45:48 <__ln__> GhostlyDeath: no it doesn't on the relevant platform. 22:45:57 *** HerzogDeXtEr1 [~Flex@89.246.195.91] has joined #openttd 22:46:39 <GhostlyDeath> On which platform does it not use SDL? 22:47:06 <__ln__> Windows, Mac OS X 22:47:19 <Yexo> Roberto: I can only reproduce that problem when not using any quotes at all 22:47:23 <GhostlyDeath> Why would OpenTTD not use SDL when SDL is cross-platform? 22:47:36 <GhostlyDeath> SDL works as it does on Linux, Windows, and Mac OS X 22:47:51 <GhostlyDeath> If OpenTTD doesn't use SDL for Windows then they should have a good reason 22:47:54 <__ln__> GhostlyDeath: "Why" is not my problem, but the fact is that it doesn't. 22:48:04 <GhostlyDeath> __ln__: What does it use on Windows then? 22:48:14 <__ln__> Although I know the "why" part too. 22:48:46 <__ln__> GhostlyDeath: Something Microsoftish, DirectSomething or whatever. 22:48:52 <Yexo> GhostlyDeath: SDL doesn't work flawless everywhere; http://bugs.openttd.org/task/3447 22:49:01 <GhostlyDeath> SDL can use Win32 directly and can use DirectDraw 22:49:23 <orudge> OpenTTD uses the Win32 GDI API directly on Windows 22:49:29 <orudge> it's generally a lot more efficient than going through SDL 22:49:35 <orudge> you have the choice of using SDL if you want, though 22:49:39 <orudge> or even Allegro 22:49:41 <xiong> I'm baffled. My new '4 Horse Hopper Carriage' will not go to a truck stop that catches a coal mine. The error is "Can't insert order... vehicle can't go to that station." Nor will it go to the steel mill, the iron ore mine, or even a bus stop. 22:49:46 *** Kurimus [Kurimus@dsl-tkubrasgw1-fe83de00-38.dhcp.inet.fi] has quit [] 22:50:11 <Yexo> you have an articulated road vehicle with a non-drive through road stop 22:50:50 <Yexo> easiest solution: build a drive through stop 22:51:10 <xiong> Oh damn. That's so blatantly obvious, Yexo. Thank you. By pure chance, I made all my bus stops ro-ros, which worked perfectly. 22:51:24 <GhostlyDeath> The screenshot in that bug report lacks red 22:51:30 <GhostlyDeath> No, it lacks green 22:52:05 <GhostlyDeath> Maybe SDL is giving the game a different color format instead of RGB 22:52:19 <glx> no SDL is broken that's all 22:52:32 <GhostlyDeath> SDL has some bugs 22:52:36 <xiong> I haven't worked an articulated vehicle yet. And I actually know something about backing up a horse carriage, too, in Real Life. 22:52:44 <GhostlyDeath> It would also depend on the version of SDL 22:52:50 <glx> and when you can use native API it's better 22:52:55 *** HerzogDeXtEr [~Flex@89.246.163.220] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 22:52:58 <xiong> "Dey is none so blind as dem who will not see." 22:52:59 <Eddi|zuHause> <__ln__> glx: but could the fullscreen be implemented as a borderless window that is the size of the current screen? <<-- i gzess a window without title bar is possible, but it would be overlapped by the task bar etc. but why bother and not just play windowed? 22:53:00 <GhostlyDeath> and then you'd have to tell the SDL team they got a bug that needs fixing 22:53:28 <glx> fixing stuff on OSX :) 22:53:49 <GhostlyDeath> Also that resizing issue is an OpenTTD bug i'd say 22:53:49 <glx> when each new OSX version breaks working things 22:54:14 *** [twisti] [~twisti@dynamic-unidsl-85-197-16-221.westend.de] has joined #openttd 22:54:15 <GhostlyDeath> I've gotten that before 22:54:23 <GhostlyDeath> But in a different area 22:54:31 <[twisti]> hi, why would a city station not accept goods ? what can i do to make it accept goods ? 22:54:45 <__ln__> Eddi|zuHause: we all know that apps such as VLC or Media Player can operate in a fullscreen mode which covers the task bar and everything, but still you can e.g. move the mouse cursor to another screen (so it is not a "real" fullscreen mode). 22:55:00 <GhostlyDeath> On Windows you can task switch regardless 22:55:14 <GhostlyDeath> But some programs lock the mouse which prevents moving around 22:55:30 <[twisti]> like 3d shooters 22:55:41 <GhostlyDeath> If you set the video mode to 256 colors, the entire desktop is affected 22:55:43 <Yexo> [twisti]: a station only accept goods if enough industry tiles or houses in the neighbourhood accept goods 22:55:57 <GhostlyDeath> Hence the loss of color 22:55:59 <Yexo> so you need to place your station closer to the city center or in a bigger city 22:56:05 *** Cybertinus [~Cybertinu@tunnel3304.ipv6.xs4all.nl] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 22:56:07 <[twisti]> it USED to accept goods 22:56:11 <[twisti]> it just suddenly stopped 22:56:21 <Eddi|zuHause> <GhostlyDeath> SDL works [...] on [...] Mac OS X <-- that's a blatant lie, i'm afraid 22:56:22 <Yexo> town buildings care sometimes removed by the game 22:56:24 <[twisti]> is there a way to make it go back ? 22:56:49 <Yexo> if there wer only one or two buildings that accepted goods and they were removed your goods acceptance is gone 22:57:07 <Yexo> you could wait for the game to randomly build a new building that accepts goods near your station or move your station 22:57:09 <[twisti]> can i somehow encourage the town to build more ... goods acceptors ? 22:57:20 <GhostlyDeath> fund local buildings maybe 22:57:24 <Yexo> no, but you can generally try to grow the town 22:57:27 <Eddi|zuHause> there is an osx port of sdl, but it doesn't actually work in any meaning of the word. 22:57:44 <[twisti]> how do i grow it other than shipping it passengers & mail from another town ? 22:57:44 <GhostlyDeath> Eddi|zuHause: I don't touch macs heh 22:57:46 <Yexo> which means: have 5 regurarly visited stations, fund local buildings every 3 months 22:57:57 <[twisti]> meh 22:58:01 <GhostlyDeath> It's not like SDL is closed source, you can submit bugs and hope they accept it 22:58:02 <Yexo> you don't actually have to ship passengers and mail 22:58:07 <[twisti]> i have like 6 stations total 22:58:25 <GhostlyDeath> SDL_mixer is just broken completely though heh 22:58:27 <Eddi|zuHause> GhostlyDeath: ok, please do that then. 22:58:37 <GhostlyDeath> Eddi|zuHause: Buy me a Mac and I will fix the bugs 22:58:41 <Yexo> [twisti]: see http://wiki.openttd.org/Town for the details 22:58:47 <[twisti]> thanks 22:58:52 <xiong> Unrelated to the orders issue: I see that my new freight carriage shows, in depot, only the horses, not the wagon itself. The wagon, together with its horses, shows properly in the all-vehicles list and on the road itself. Bug or feature? 22:59:04 <Eddi|zuHause> how stupid do you think i am? 22:59:19 <GhostlyDeath> You want me to fix a bug but I don't have the correct hardware to do such things 22:59:44 <__ln__> GhostlyDeath: a talented guy like you does it by looking at the code, without using hardware. 22:59:47 *** Wizzleby [~wizzleby@pool-108-16-114-12.phlapa.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 22:59:53 <GhostlyDeath> __ln__: How do you test it? 23:00:07 <GhostlyDeath> Shipping the code off to someone else is unreliable, trust me 23:00:23 <GhostlyDeath> There is VNC but it is inconvenient 23:00:30 <Eddi|zuHause> GhostlyDeath: don't you think we asked that exact same questions when we deprecated the mac port? 23:00:45 <[twisti]> Yexo: do i understand that page correctly that less than 5 stations still work, just not as fast as 5 ? 23:00:50 <GhostlyDeath> You could also drop SDL and make your own replacement 23:00:53 <Yexo> [twisti]: yes 23:00:59 <__ln__> lol, VNC is the perfect solution for debugging palette issues 23:01:06 <[twisti]> awesome 23:01:28 <GhostlyDeath> When I ported my own program to Mac OS X, I VNCed and SSHed into his system to get it done, was very nice 23:01:28 <Eddi|zuHause> GhostlyDeath: we had a replacement, it was called cocoa, and then apple deprecated that one. 23:01:37 <[twisti]> also, would it be a good idea in general to demolish some buildings in the center of a town to build a super busy station there and then wait for the town to grow around it ? 23:01:45 <GhostlyDeath> Eddi|zuHause: wasn't cocoa their super duper UI? 23:01:54 <Rubidium> and then we deprecated the whole OS X port 23:02:02 <GhostlyDeath> What replaced cocoa then? 23:02:07 <__ln__> Eddi|zuHause: apple certainly didn't deprecate cocoa. some other api probably. quickdraw. 23:02:14 <Rubidium> following in the footsteps of Steve 23:02:15 <GhostlyDeath> When was this deprecation anyway? 23:02:46 <GhostlyDeath> First google of "Mac cocoa deprecated" says the Cocoa-Java API 23:02:55 <Eddi|zuHause> __ln__: i only heard stuff third hand, but the parts of the API we used threw lots of deprecation warnings 23:02:59 <GhostlyDeath> back in 2005 23:03:39 <Eddi|zuHause> maybe it was only the 8bpp parts or something 23:03:46 <Eddi|zuHause> i really have no idea 23:04:00 <__ln__> Eddi|zuHause: no doubt about that, but i think it was the parts that were not using cocoa. 23:04:02 <Rubidium> if only they did deprecate 8bpp 23:04:03 <orudge> 8-bit has been deprecated in Snow Leopard, basically 23:04:05 <Rubidium> but they didn't 23:04:10 <orudge> or so it seems 23:04:21 <GhostlyDeath> Unless you recompile it and see what it says 23:04:34 <GhostlyDeath> It's not uncommon that everything is deprecated 23:04:38 <GhostlyDeath> just look at what MS did 23:04:51 <Rubidium> it depends on some combination of iDunno and iSomething 23:04:54 <orudge> GhostlyDeath: hmm? Microsoft generally maintains excellent backwards compatibility 23:05:07 <orudge> indeed, it's one of the reasons the various Windows APIs are such a mess :p 23:05:30 <GhostlyDeath> hehehe, like that PDF orudge 23:05:39 <orudge> hmm? 23:05:43 <GhostlyDeath> orudge: I was referring to the deprecation of the C library 23:05:52 <GhostlyDeath> orudge: It's a paper on about how they maintained compatibility with programs 23:05:53 <__ln__> Eddi|zuHause: QuickDraw is something that has existed in MacOS Classic since forever, according to the internet. 23:05:57 <orudge> ah, you mean the "insecure" functions and so on? 23:06:13 <GhostlyDeath> They fixed a bug and the program and it crashed since it relied on a bug or did something wrong completely 23:06:18 <GhostlyDeath> and yes I do mean that 23:06:35 <orudge> [18:07:56] <GhostlyDeath> They fixed a bug and the program and it crashed since it relied on a bug or did something wrong completely <-- yep 23:06:39 <orudge> there's a lot of that in Windows 23:06:48 <GhostlyDeath> That's why it's so buggy 23:06:49 <orudge> I work on Wine, and we generally aim for Wine to be "bug-compatible" with Windows 23:06:57 <orudge> even if something is wrong, we have to implement the same hacks Microsoft did 23:07:00 <orudge> at least, in some cases 23:07:01 <GhostlyDeath> orudge: How's Win64 coming along? 23:07:08 <orudge> Reasonably well at the moment 23:07:13 <Rubidium> in that case, deprecate in Windows means: "please don't use it, but it will still work", in OS X it means: "please don't use it as it will definitely not work some time soon" 23:07:14 <orudge> Wine 1.2 supports 64-bit 23:07:31 <GhostlyDeath> mingw-w64? 23:07:45 <orudge> I'm not quite sure what mingw-w64 has to do with it as such 23:07:55 <orudge> but you can build a 64-bit and a 32-bit version of Wine on a 64-bit Linux 23:07:57 <GhostlyDeath> It's the only GCC that I know of 23:08:05 <orudge> and run both 64-bit and 32-bit applications in the same Wine environment 23:08:16 <orudge> 64-bit isn't especially well tested just now though 23:08:23 <GhostlyDeath> I got a bunch of 64-bit systems 23:08:23 <glx> mingw-64 is not stable yet 23:08:25 <orudge> and there will no doubt be issues 23:08:33 <GhostlyDeath> glx: mingw64 works pretty good but there are bugs 23:08:47 <GhostlyDeath> But it's not like they'd ignore your bug report 23:09:17 <GhostlyDeath> I assist in their efforts, although slightly 23:09:21 <__ln__> there's also: http://bugs.openttd.org/task/588 23:09:24 <Eddi|zuHause> i can't download mods in civ5 under wine... 23:10:00 <Eddi|zuHause> says some "BITS" [or so] service wasn't running 23:10:18 <GhostlyDeath> ReactOS is nice though, despite it's youngness 23:10:28 <glx> BITS is used by windows update 23:10:30 <GhostlyDeath> Buggy though 23:10:33 <orudge> that's a Microsoft service 23:10:37 <orudge> which isn't implemented in Wine 23:11:01 <Eddi|zuHause> orudge: but "net start bits" says some stuff about starting and running 23:11:05 <GhostlyDeath> I have yet to try WINE 1.2 though 23:11:06 <orudge> well 23:11:08 <glx> background transfer service or something like that 23:11:11 <orudge> it isn't fully implemented 23:11:26 <Eddi|zuHause> then it needs more implementing ;) 23:11:29 <Rubidium> glx: apparantly it's intelligent as well 23:11:32 <orudge> feel free to ;) 23:11:34 <Eddi|zuHause> IT'S URGENT!!!11!einself 23:11:45 <GhostlyDeath> When I can run MSVC++ 9 in WINE, i'll be happy 23:11:54 <GhostlyDeath> and up 23:11:55 <orudge> GhostlyDeath: the compiler (should) work 23:12:04 <orudge> you can install it via winetricks 23:12:16 <Eddi|zuHause> orudge: i also can't install MSVC 2010 stuff necessary for the civ5 sdk! 23:12:18 <GhostlyDeath> I like to avoid winetricks, it's very tricky 23:12:27 <orudge> well, install it by hand 23:12:35 <orudge> Eddi|zuHause: shocking 23:12:39 <orudge> :p 23:12:39 <GhostlyDeath> Plus sXs is kinda messy 23:12:41 <glx> Eddi|zuHause: civ5 is too recent ;) 23:12:43 <GhostlyDeath> SxS* 23:12:48 <orudge> Civ5 in general works reasonably well under CrossOver 23:12:50 <orudge> except on Leopard 23:12:53 <orudge> it works fine on Snow Leopard though 23:13:03 <Eddi|zuHause> i'm on linux 23:13:04 <glx> and a bad idea, your time will disappear 23:13:12 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, civ5 itself works 23:13:21 <GhostlyDeath> But he wants to hack it 23:13:34 <GhostlyDeath> make his own game and sell it only to be sued by it's creators who want all the money he earned from it 23:13:47 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: orudge * r20984 /extra/website/account/templates/account/ (13 files): [website] -Change: Assorted spelling/grammar changes and rewordings 23:13:54 <GhostlyDeath> Which will then hire him at a low wage where he will work on the game outside of what he originally intended 23:14:00 <Eddi|zuHause> i'm hoping they release the civ5 patch soon-ish 23:14:11 <GhostlyDeath> and will be unhappy with the game, leave and start his own company 23:14:12 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: orudge * r20985 /extra/website/bananas/templates/bananas/ (index.html notAvailableYet.html tosInner.html): [website] -Change: Assorted spelling/grammar changes and rewordings 23:14:14 <Eddi|zuHause> has some important initial issues... 23:14:21 *** fanioz [~fanioz@180.214.232.7] has joined #openttd 23:14:39 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: orudge * r20986 /extra/website/frontpage/templates/frontpage/ (about.html development.html download.html links.html): [website] -Change: Assorted spelling/grammar changes and rewordings 23:14:56 <GhostlyDeath> orudge: Win64 is not that different from Win32 though 23:15:00 <orudge> GhostlyDeath: quite 23:15:02 <GhostlyDeath> just some types and pointer size 23:15:08 <orudge> compared to Win16 -> Win32, they're practically the same 23:15:16 <GhostlyDeath> Win32 is not Win16 heh 23:15:24 <GhostlyDeath> Win32 was a major overhaul 23:15:26 <__ln__> should we have a parallel channel called #openttd-sdl-fanatics to which the discussion about using SDL on all platforms could be conveniently redirected? 23:15:27 <orudge> that's what I'm saying 23:15:43 <GhostlyDeath> There's no open source Win16 compilers I know of 23:15:46 <GhostlyDeath> except for maybe Watcom 23:15:47 <orudge> GhostlyDeath: Open Watcom 23:15:50 <GhostlyDeath> yeah 23:15:55 <GhostlyDeath> I havn't got any Win16 systems though 23:16:00 <GhostlyDeath> I'm gonna port OpenTTD to Win16 23:16:02 <orudge> there are also closed source compilers that have been released for free 23:16:05 <orudge> (as in beer) 23:16:09 <orudge> such as old versions of Borland 23:16:10 <orudge> I believe 23:16:13 <Eddi|zuHause> __ln__: i don't see any such discussion ;) 23:16:17 <GhostlyDeath> Borland's compiler are hard to get 23:16:27 * orudge still has some Windows 3.x VMs floating around 23:16:28 <GhostlyDeath> You used to be able to get them but then someone bought them out afaik 23:16:29 <glx> not the delphi one 23:16:45 <GhostlyDeath> I tried downloading one and I had difficulty getting it sometime ago 23:16:47 <Eddi|zuHause> i have delphi 2 on some diskettes lying around 23:17:34 <GhostlyDeath> I remember BGI 23:17:40 <GhostlyDeath> heh 23:18:09 <Eddi|zuHause> i used to have delphi 6 also 23:18:19 <Eddi|zuHause> but i have no idea where 23:18:25 <[twisti]> i learned programming with pascal 23:18:26 <GhostlyDeath> I got an educational version of MSVC6 23:18:27 <[twisti]> 3.0 i think 23:18:29 <Eddi|zuHause> hm... a kernel update... 23:18:30 <glx> I still have Turbo Pascal 6 somewhere 23:18:36 <xiong> [twisti] Disclaimer: I'm new at this and don't know much. But so far, what I've seen is that tiles central to a city fill in very solidly, very quickly. So demolishing an interior building will not have long-term consequence. But chances are, interior tiles will contain superior buildings, which you will find expensive to demolish and besides, you will lose all that pop. 23:18:42 <orudge> I have rather a lot of old compilers and the like lurking around 23:18:44 <Eddi|zuHause> i'm pretty sure that's a bad idea right now... 23:18:49 <[twisti]> and then i got my first borland turbo pascal 6.0 compiler/ide and was like "omgomgomg" 23:18:59 <GhostlyDeath> I collect old compilers 23:18:59 <orudge> plus MSDN carried many ancient versions of MSVC, etc 23:19:03 <orudge> although they've mostly been removed now 23:19:15 <GhostlyDeath> I started programming in C with a Turbo C++ 23:19:27 <GhostlyDeath> A friend gave me it................ 23:19:34 <[twisti]> yay, my city accepts goods again! (just after i built a second station + tracks ofc) 23:19:39 <GhostlyDeath> orudge: They got old versions of Windows still 23:19:43 <glx> like the references to pre-2000 in API docs 23:19:47 <GhostlyDeath> but you gotta pay a hefty subscription free 23:19:59 <Eddi|zuHause> i started programming with a dbase 3 clone called foxbase+ 23:20:04 <GhostlyDeath> I got the SDK just before they deprecated Windows 98 23:20:07 <Eddi|zuHause> and later switched to borland pascal 7 23:20:10 <xiong> [twisti] I find very useful to build a ro-ro bus stop as close to the town center (the town name sign) as possible, which is cheap and non-obtrusive. Then a rail station can be built on the outskirts and connected to the ro-ro bus. 23:20:12 <orudge> GhostlyDeath: I've managed to acquire pretty much every version of Windows over the years anyway 23:20:13 <__ln__> glx: since you are listed also as "General Coding"; does it make sense on any platform to try fullscreen at the same resolution as the window is? typically the window is smaller than the screen, otherwise it wouldn't fit on it. 23:20:15 <GhostlyDeath> Because after that point, they all say Supported in "Windows 2000" 23:20:20 * orudge still has Windows 3.0 and 3.1 on floppies 23:20:29 * GhostlyDeath still has Windows 98 SE running on PCs 23:20:35 <orudge> yes, that is a little bit annoying 23:20:38 <[twisti]> xiong: ro-ro ? and how do you connect a rail station to a bus station ? 23:20:49 <orudge> Watcom 10.6 came with a nice win32.hlp 23:20:52 <GhostlyDeath> So even though I support a 12 year old OS... 23:20:56 <orudge> being a rather huge file containing the Win32 SDK of the time 23:21:23 <GhostlyDeath> plus the documentation of the PSDK 2003 R2 is nice 23:21:29 <xiong> [twisti] A through station, one of the two to the right in the GUI, as opposed to one of the four dead-end stations, is a ro-ro -- roll in, roll out. 23:21:43 *** Keiya_ is now known as Keiya 23:21:52 <[twisti]> ah, yeah, i use those most of the time, just didnt know that term 23:21:52 <xiong> You can build a ro-ro bus or truck stop on a town road without demolishing anything. 23:22:05 <Eddi|zuHause> [twisti]: you connect two stations by building them adjacent or using the ctrl key 23:22:18 <GhostlyDeath> Why would you want to ever join stations? 23:22:38 <GhostlyDeath> 1 station is all you'll ever need 23:22:41 <[twisti]> i still dont get how i would build a train station on the outskirts and then connect it to a bus station on the inside 23:22:46 <Eddi|zuHause> GhostlyDeath: have you ever played the game? 23:22:50 <GhostlyDeath> Eddi|zuHause: yes I have 23:22:55 <xiong> There are good reasons to use the dead-end stops, though, [twisti]. Depending on your road layout, it can take a long time for a bus to turn around -- it will not turn around right inside the ro-ro. 23:22:57 <glx> __ln__: feel free to open a bug report/feature request about it 23:23:07 <GhostlyDeath> The non-dead end stops are bad I say 23:23:15 <GhostlyDeath> Because every single truck stops at it 23:23:18 <__ln__> glx: it's not mine, but: http://bugs.openttd.org/task/588 23:23:18 <GhostlyDeath> and causes traffic jams 23:23:31 <[twisti]> GhostlyDeath: you can turn that off 23:23:32 <xiong> GhostlyDeath, use 'Non-stop'. 23:23:33 <Eddi|zuHause> [twisti]: look up "feeder service" in the wiki 23:23:38 <[twisti]> thanks 23:23:58 <GhostlyDeath> Would that prevent trucks from stopping even if they have no load there 23:23:58 <GhostlyDeath> ? 23:24:06 <xiong> [twisti] Are you asking from a prototype viewpoint or from a game mechanics viewpoint? 23:24:23 <xiong> Yes, GhostlyDeath; non-stop means they don't stop. 23:24:25 <[twisti]> i dont know what you mean by that 23:24:28 <[twisti]> im just playing the game 23:24:40 <[twisti]> trying to understand how things work 23:24:48 <GhostlyDeath> Buses at bus stops that aren't dead ends when loading should pull off to the side 23:24:57 <xiong> [twisti] Real trains, trucks, houses, and roads are 'prototypes'. The game is a model of the prototype. 23:25:26 <xiong> There is a prototype consideration and a mechanics consideration. Your question might be interpreted either way. 23:25:27 <[twisti]> then im asking game mechanics lol 23:25:29 <GhostlyDeath> At least in my version, buses loading from non dead end stops block traffic for awhile 23:25:39 <[twisti]> i dont care how it works irl 23:26:19 <GhostlyDeath> When the year reaches 2200s, transporter technology should become available 23:26:27 <GhostlyDeath> to instantly transport goods from one end of the map to another 23:26:33 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: rubidium * r20987 /extra/website/ (6 files in 4 dirs): [Website] -Fix: assortment of small fixes/updates that were already "live" but not committed, e.g. support for newer versions of OpenTTD in BaNaNaS, base graphics set upload fix, etc 23:26:55 <GhostlyDeath> And in 1994, a technology in the shape of the ring that creates a wormhole to another ring should be available also 23:26:55 <Eddi|zuHause> GhostlyDeath: the game already has instantaneous transportation 23:26:57 <xiong> [twisti] Then, assuming you have enabled such in Advanced Settings, just hold down Ctrl key when placing a new station, of any kind. You will not immediately place the station but instead see a menu of choices. Click on an existing station and your new station will become part of the existing station, logically, as if the two had been built adjacent. 23:27:13 <GhostlyDeath> Eddi|zuHause: Which is that? I havn't found any so far 23:27:28 <[twisti]> oh btw, i found a solution to my problem with spacing out multile trains on the same tracks without complicated signal magic or the time table thing - just have a long area of your track without signals, and if two trains clump, the 2nd one will have to wait there for the first to clear the whole stretch 23:27:30 <Eddi|zuHause> i'm not going to tell you, then. :p 23:27:44 <[twisti]> thanks xiong 23:27:46 <GhostlyDeath> Eddi|zuHause: Why not? 23:27:57 <glx> Eddi|zuHause: station walking ? 23:28:01 <Eddi|zuHause> because i'm sinister. 23:28:13 <Rubidium> those rings are called tunnels in-game, but are in fact wormholes 23:28:16 <Eddi|zuHause> glx: well, "walking" isn't really part of it anymore ;) 23:28:16 <GhostlyDeath> Stations supplying and demanding it's own goods 23:28:26 <glx> true :) 23:28:33 <GhostlyDeath> i.e. woods next to a sawmill 23:28:40 <GhostlyDeath> single station wanting wood, another giving wood 23:28:44 <GhostlyDeath> That? 23:28:48 <xiong> [twisti] You will find that several hours' investment of time studying Advanced Settings will pay off. It's really that complex. OpenTTD, compared to say, RRT2 or SC2K, is about 8 times more complex, perhaps 32, if one could be that precise. 23:29:15 <[twisti]> meh @ sc2k 23:29:15 <glx> no you'll still need to transport stuff from source to dest for it to be accepted 23:29:21 <[twisti]> i prefer sc4 23:29:26 <GhostlyDeath> glx: Even to itself? 23:29:28 <[twisti]> because its actually really hard 23:29:32 <glx> yes 23:29:33 *** avdg [~avdg@94-227-100-192.access.telenet.be] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 23:29:35 <[twisti]> unless you fast forward to millions 23:29:39 <GhostlyDeath> You can just have a bunch of dead end stops next to each other heh 23:29:54 <GhostlyDeath> I had trucks drive 1 tile to transport stuff 23:30:02 <[twisti]> shame they never made sc4 work right in win7 23:30:13 <Eddi|zuHause> sc4 is only hard if you start to borrow money 23:30:15 <xiong> [twisti] http://wiki.openttd.org/Advanced_Settings/Interface and friends. You want http://wiki.openttd.org/Advanced_Settings/Stations in particular. 23:30:40 <GhostlyDeath> heh SC as SimCity, thought you meant Starcraft 23:30:41 <Eddi|zuHause> sc or sc2k were much harder in that respect... 23:30:42 *** avdg [~avdg@94-227-100-192.access.telenet.be] has joined #openttd 23:31:09 <[twisti]> err, no 23:31:14 <Eddi|zuHause> GhostlyDeath: you have your associative dissonnance backwards :p 23:31:18 <[twisti]> sc4 is pretty hard if you play at sensible speeds 23:31:33 <[twisti]> because its basically designed to break even at all but easy/lowest density 23:31:35 <glx> IIRC windows included some bugfixes/special handling for simcity 23:31:41 <xiong> Note that it is extremely useful to increase station spread. According to Eddi|zuHause, you may safely ignore the dire warning about large station spread slowing down the game. I can say I've doubled it, to 24, without ill mechanical effect. However, large spread quickly becomes unrealistic. I've reduced mine to 18. 23:32:05 <[twisti]> glx: its gone with 7 - it just breaks sc4 now (but not for everyone), its listed as unsupported too 23:32:19 <GhostlyDeath> I want a station spread of 2048 23:32:28 <Rubidium> simcity != simcity 4 23:32:34 <xiong> SC2K sucked, IMO, largely because of the crummy traffic generator. 23:32:51 <xiong> RRT2 sucked in so many ways, I'm not at liberty to say. 23:33:24 <[twisti]> i liked sc2k but it got boring quickly because once you figured out what made money, youd just repeat that until the map was full 23:33:35 <xiong> But I will admit that I spent many hundreds of hours on both. I have a real fear that the entire remainder of my time on Earth is going to fall into OpenTTD. 23:33:42 <Eddi|zuHause> i played so many hours of sc2k... 23:34:16 <Eddi|zuHause> but once you built those mega-thingies, there was hardly any sense to it anymore 23:34:26 <xiong> I think it is fair to say that OTTD encompasses all of SC and RRT. plus much more. That's scary. 23:34:31 <Rubidium> we're actually talking about simcity (1) and a special mode for Windows' memory allocator to make it run SimCity properly 23:34:32 *** dfox [~dfox@ip-89-176-209-74.net.upcbroadband.cz] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 23:34:39 <glx> [twisti]: usually if something fails in a new version of windows, it's because it was badly coded 23:35:05 <GhostlyDeath> Or they tried fixing a bug 23:35:08 <[twisti]> glx: while that is entirely possible, it still pisses me off that one of my top5 games doesnt run on my new awesome rig 23:35:13 <Eddi|zuHause> glx: you can assume that >95% of proprietary software is badly coded ;) 23:35:22 <GhostlyDeath> Eddi|zuHause: Except code that I write 23:35:33 *** Pulec [~pulec@static-cl093181068250.unet.cz] has quit [] 23:35:34 <xiong> Arcologies. I have twice built enough arcos to launch and start over. I cannot tell you why, the second time around. It's exceedingly boring and requires that almost half the board be covered in identical arcos. 23:35:43 <ccfreak2k> Mostly because 95% of programmers either have no business programming or are cramming for deadlines. 23:35:52 <GhostlyDeath> or they don't know 23:36:04 <xiong> You can now play SC1 online. FWIW. 23:36:04 * Rubidium guesses he has primarily seen the former category 23:36:19 <Rubidium> otherwise you're not going to manually "unfold" a loop 23:36:20 <[twisti]> ccfreak2k: i offer a different reason 23:36:20 <GhostlyDeath> Some programmers are not programmers 23:36:20 <ccfreak2k> There's also the ones in that 5% that cram for deadlines but make it work anyway. 23:36:27 *** Keiya_ [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has joined #openttd 23:36:45 <[twisti]> the fun in programming is, for most people, learning new things and figuring out new things 23:37:05 <[twisti]> spending 40 hours a day repeating things you already know well is extremely boring to most programmers i know 23:37:19 <xiong> Oh, speaking of making money... I gotta go. [twisti], it's very hard to be newer here than I am but you may be the guy. Feel free to ask me very new questions when I'm on. 23:37:22 <GhostlyDeath> Alot of them get hit by the logic 23:37:25 <[twisti]> hence programmers tend to do things they dont understand well, because they are more exciting than doing things they know work 23:37:28 <ccfreak2k> That's pretty much their fault for taking up programming as a profession. 23:37:33 <[twisti]> thank you xiong 23:37:41 <GhostlyDeath> I love logic 23:37:47 <GhostlyDeath> And logic loves me 23:38:05 <glx> logic is vital when programming 23:38:06 <[twisti]> so thats why most programs contain bad code 23:38:19 <Rubidium> yeah, I particularly like triggering bugs in compilers 23:38:38 <[twisti]> im very proud to have actually FOUND one in my whole life :| 23:38:39 <GhostlyDeath> Triggering compiler bugs are nasty 23:38:40 <glx> dune2 is full of weirdness :) 23:38:56 <GhostlyDeath> Because then you have to go around the bug just to get it working 23:39:10 <glx> dead code, useless tests 23:39:29 <[twisti]> GhostlyDeath: opposite for me - i had to go around the bugfix 23:39:40 <GhostlyDeath> [twisti]: what was the bug? 23:40:03 <GhostlyDeath> On a certain line of code I wrote, something very simple, GCC exploded and said "Internal compiler error" 23:40:10 <[twisti]> class loader in java ... i want to say 1.4, but it was a long time ago 23:40:11 <GhostlyDeath> Other code did the same thing for MSVC also 23:40:18 <GhostlyDeath> 1.4 is old 23:40:24 <GhostlyDeath> and depreciated, nobody loves it anymore 23:40:31 <[twisti]> the bug was, custom class loaders would come precached with the classes from the default CL 23:40:44 *** KritiK [~Maxim@95-27-101-241.broadband.corbina.ru] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 23:40:45 <Rubidium> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38509 <- that's a nice one 23:40:47 <[twisti]> so what people would do was just make custom CLs and use them for everything 23:40:52 <[twisti]> and then in 1.5 i think it was fixed 23:40:59 <Rubidium> and currently OpenTTD's trunk triggers an internal error in ICC 23:41:02 <[twisti]> and suddenly the custom CLs could ONLY do their custom stuff 23:41:14 <[twisti]> and not load normal, java core classes anymore 23:41:29 <GhostlyDeath> I know for Java 23:41:36 <[twisti]> and lots of things using the old buggy CLs stopped working 23:41:42 <GhostlyDeath> alot of people I met hated me because I dynamically used Java 23:41:47 <GhostlyDeath> They said Java was static 23:41:51 <[twisti]> with helpful exceptions like "Can't find a class definition for String" 23:42:07 <GhostlyDeath> If your java implementation lacks String... 23:42:12 <[twisti]> it doesnt 23:42:17 <[twisti]> pay attention :| 23:42:21 <GhostlyDeath> I am 23:42:25 <[twisti]> i JUST described why it said that 23:42:35 <GhostlyDeath> But they got their own class loaders now 23:42:50 <[twisti]> right, which USED to be able to load all the default stuff 23:43:14 <[twisti]> or rather inherited them, i think 23:43:18 <GhostlyDeath> But they shouldn't have been using custom loaders anyway despite it being broken 23:43:23 *** Xaroth_ [~Xaroth@86.92.135.101] has joined #openttd 23:43:28 <[twisti]> why not 23:43:40 <GhostlyDeath> It would break later on of course, always happens 23:44:02 *** Keiya [~Keiya@pool-96-230-229-184.mdsnwi.dsl-w.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 23:44:07 <GhostlyDeath> [twisti]: How about this 23:44:08 <[twisti]> well, fair enough, but its an odd problem that isnt really apparent if you dont know about the bug 23:44:28 <GhostlyDeath> Obtaining a list of functions for dynamic usage based on existence in a class 23:44:45 <[twisti]> like reflection ? 23:44:48 <GhostlyDeath> I made some code that would look in a class' declared functions and add it to a list based on an index in it's name 23:44:51 <GhostlyDeath> yes 23:44:52 <GhostlyDeath> reflection 23:45:00 <GhostlyDeath> It was an emulator 23:45:15 <GhostlyDeath> Functions were named after their opcode ID, OpCode_12 for example 23:45:35 <GhostlyDeath> The reflection handler would then find the function named OpCode_12 and place it in the 12th spot 23:45:48 <[twisti]> spot of what ? 23:45:50 <GhostlyDeath> Then once that opcode was struck it called the function 23:45:53 <GhostlyDeath> array 23:46:14 <[twisti]> sounds relatively reasonable 23:46:30 <GhostlyDeath> It works as it should in Java 23:46:53 <GhostlyDeath> It worked out great 23:46:55 <[twisti]> i always tried to avoid reflection, always seemed hacky and shoddy 23:46:59 <GhostlyDeath> Not for me 23:47:12 <[twisti]> but in all fairness thats probably because most people who use reflection abuse it 23:47:21 <GhostlyDeath> Alot of Java people i've met in life hate reflection 23:47:24 *** xiong [~xiong@netblock-68-183-253-72.dslextreme.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 23:47:26 <[twisti]> because they dont understand the language and how to do what they want to do correctly 23:47:26 <GhostlyDeath> and hate you if you use it 23:47:37 <GhostlyDeath> But I did Java for awhile 23:47:47 <GhostlyDeath> and I read all the docs to see what should happen before I didit 23:47:54 <GhostlyDeath> did some single test programs 23:48:07 <[twisti]> i love java, as long as you exclude swing 23:48:13 <Eddi|zuHause> if you want a dynamic language like that, why not use python or something? 23:48:16 <GhostlyDeath> heh... swing................... 23:48:20 <GhostlyDeath> Java IS dynamic 23:48:26 <GhostlyDeath> It does do what it does 23:48:39 <GhostlyDeath> Java is meant to do that 23:48:49 <[twisti]> swing has gotten fairly usable over the years, but gods, it used to be SO incredibly bad 23:49:00 <GhostlyDeath> Doesn't work in GCJ though 23:49:06 <GhostlyDeath> Swing was bad 23:49:20 <GhostlyDeath> AWT was nice 23:49:22 <[twisti]> its still pretty terrible in parts 23:49:27 *** Xaroth__ [~Xaroth@86.92.135.101] has joined #openttd 23:49:28 <[twisti]> like treelists 23:49:29 <Eddi|zuHause> "X does Y", "X is meant to do Y", "X is designed to do Y" and "X is best suited to do Y" are fundamently different propositions 23:49:30 <GhostlyDeath> It reminded me of things 23:50:10 <[twisti]> you shouldnt have to write custom renderers just to get a behaviour considered the default by multiple major operating systems 23:50:13 *** Xaroth [~Xaroth@86.92.135.101] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 23:50:15 <GhostlyDeath> [twisti]: Just beware, some say Reflection is not possible in Java 23:50:24 <[twisti]> thats just silly 23:50:49 <[twisti]> but its generally just silly to claim anything in programming languages impossible 23:50:50 <GhostlyDeath> The best thing to say to them is "What about the class loader?" 23:50:54 <Rubidium> fills that with X:="Rubidium", Y:="sleep now". Won't hold now, but should pretty soon 23:51:13 <ccfreak2k> Rubidium is best suited to do sleep now? 23:51:14 <GhostlyDeath> Rubidium: X inherits off Y, Y is an implementation of X 23:51:15 <[twisti]> Rubidium is designed and best suited to sleeping now ? 23:51:16 <[twisti]> :p 23:51:44 <GhostlyDeath> Rubidium inherits off Sleep, Sleep is an implementation of Rubidium 23:52:05 <[twisti]> speaking off "impossible", did you guys see that guy who built a APU in that lego like computer game ? 23:52:12 <[twisti]> thats just ridiculous 23:52:16 <GhostlyDeath> Nope 23:52:34 <GhostlyDeath> provided there is core logic you can do anything really 23:52:40 <ccfreak2k> Switched over at the right moment to see my Mesa build fail. 23:52:54 <Eddi|zuHause> [twisti]: did you see the guys who implemented counters and cpus in openttd? 23:53:06 <[twisti]> probably about the same idea eddi 23:53:06 <GhostlyDeath> People made counters in Boom (Doom) 23:53:09 <ccfreak2k> [twisti], you're probably talking about Minecraft. 23:53:29 <[twisti]> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGkkyKZVzug 23:53:32 <[twisti]> yeah 23:54:19 <Eddi|zuHause> well, at least minecraft has builtin "wires" and "switches" 23:54:33 <GhostlyDeath> You can do it in OpenTTD 23:54:33 *** Xaroth [~Xaroth@86.92.135.101] has joined #openttd 23:54:35 <GhostlyDeath> with trains! 23:54:54 <GhostlyDeath> train signals 23:55:01 <avdg> nice 23:55:11 <avdg> <3 logics 23:55:16 <Eddi|zuHause> GhostlyDeath: but usually these things require the NAND signal patch, not a clean trunk 23:55:42 *** Xaroth_ [~Xaroth@86.92.135.101] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 23:56:00 <GhostlyDeath> Implement your own NAND 23:56:03 <Eddi|zuHause> GhostlyDeath: you have a hard time building a NOT gate without those 23:56:19 <GhostlyDeath> Then after that's done 23:56:25 <GhostlyDeath> Make a CPU and a compiler in OpenTTD 23:56:27 *** KenjiE20 [~KenjiE20@92.22.66.123] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 0.3.3] 23:56:30 <GhostlyDeath> and run OpenTTD in OpenTTD 23:56:34 <Eddi|zuHause> if it's possible at all, it needs ridiculous amounts of space 23:56:42 * avdg wishes memorycells 23:56:58 <GhostlyDeath> Buses for memory storage 23:57:11 <avdg> uh, how? :p 23:57:21 <GhostlyDeath> Someone will figure it out 23:58:02 <ccfreak2k> Bus with one passenger capacity. 23:58:06 *** Brianetta [~brian@188-220-91-30.zone11.bethere.co.uk] has quit [Quit: TschÃŒÃ] 23:58:08 <GhostlyDeath> Trap buses in dead end areas? 23:58:12 <ccfreak2k> The loading of a passenger indicates the presence of a charge. 23:58:16 <ccfreak2k> Or something. 23:58:16 <GhostlyDeath> if they are trapped it's set, otherwise unset? 23:58:17 <Eddi|zuHause> well, DRAM cells are easy using a train and a few signals. but SRAM is more difficult, because it needs circular/recursive signal updating 23:58:18 <avdg> how do you read it? 23:58:23 <ccfreak2k> And then you short the trains to ground. :) 23:58:28 *** ^Spike^ [~spike@d200003.upc-d.chello.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 23:58:42 <GhostlyDeath> What if the train breaks down? 23:58:49 <avdg> its set off :) 23:58:49 *** Xaroth__ [~Xaroth@86.92.135.101] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds] 23:58:51 <Eddi|zuHause> there are no breakdowns 23:58:57 <Eddi|zuHause> *handwave* 23:59:24 <ccfreak2k> GhostlyDeath, well then your CPU craps out! 23:59:26 *** Xaroth_ [~Xaroth@86.92.135.101] has joined #openttd