DCoders INI Checker need improvemts

[~Cool Guest~]

Hello
DCoders INI Checker need improvemts
Here is what I think:

When you press, the "Check" button, there should be diffrence/more options:
- Check if weapon dont exist on unit/bulding
- Check if a projectile is missing
- Check if a warhead is missing
- Check if there is a code that is misspelled/dont exist
- Check if a Deathweapon is missing

Also:
- Be able to fix problem itself, exempel if some warhead exist in [Warheads] but not anywere else, it should be erased
- Save all errors in a txt file(so you can use the search funktion, I got like 1000 errors)
- Handle Npatchs new armor types and countries


Its a great tool and need some more work imo

[Renegade]

1. How about you offer help if you want work done?
   
2. It is usually wise to not sound quite as annoying/condescending/dismissive when you want help.
   
3. You use NPatch. Not only does that strongly imply you're very much in the wrong forum, but VK has also officially admitted to not doing any bugtesting before release. Therefore, it is highly unlikely your game or mod will ever be in a state that could be considered "bug-free", and, as such, your experience fighting errors is not representative of the average user.
   In other words: We cannot rule out all problems you're having wouldn't be gone if you used a properly developed patch, and, as such, it'd be silly to alter a provenly working tool just to accommodate an environment that is broken by default.
   
4. On the same note, independent from the fact that I rather doubt NPatch itself handles NPatch's new armor types and countries well, VK is known for randomly and uselessly changing tag names around. It is impossible to handle any part of his work, because what is CountryTagFoo= today might be CountryTagBarBlueMoon= tomorrow.
   
5. As the wise one pointed out, if you seriously got that many errors, the INI Checker is the least of your problems. It sounds like you don't even have the most minor of clues what you're doing and rely on the INI Checker to fix your guesswork. That is not the type of modding we are promoting and supporting, and, as such, I rather doubt D would re-code his tool in a way that would basically make it worse than TibEd in its implications.
   
6. Lastly, as if all of the general problems above weren't enough, your ideas of everything are naive at best, and delusional at worst:
   Code cannot determine intent. Independent from the massive logic/database that would be necessary to even find words that could potentially be typos, how would the program auto-fix them?
   If you have "AARateo=", is that a typo of "AARatio=" or "AARate="?
   If you have Arm=, is that the flag Arm=, or a truncated Armor=?
   If you have Armor=, is that Armor=, or a truncated ArmorAircraftMult=, or a truncated ArmorBuildingsMult, or a truncated ArmorDefensesMult=, or a truncated ArmorInfantryMult=, or a truncated ArmorUnitsMult= or a truncated Armory=?
   
   Not to mention the retardedness of suggesting to remove unmatched warheads from the [Warheads] list.
   What if the list entry is correct, and the warhead itself is misspelled? e.g. [Warheads].900=KaboomWH and [KabommWH]. Then instead of making sure the user makes it right, you fuck up the code more by not only removing a clear indicator there is confusion there, but also by leaving a Warhead unreferenced in the Warheads list, breaking game and map functions, which will be irrelevant anyway, because if any weapon correctly referenced KabookWH, there'll be an error anyway.
   Of course, the user will fix the typo, think all is well now, not knowing that your genius little fix removed the list entry, setting it up for failure.
   Or, the other way around, the list entry is incorrect, and the warhead is fine - the warhead will likely work for a little while because not all functions rely on the list. But when the time comes and the game breaks, the user never even has a chance to find out where the problem is from, because the Checker doesn't cry about a wrong list entry - there is none, after all. If the modder does realize the problem is with the list, he's left to wonder whether he forgot to list it in the first place, or the Checker quietly fucked up his code.

Oh, did I mention "INI Checker" implies "INI checking" as its main function, not "spell checking" or "auto-generating code for people too retarded to get basic, logical connections right"?

If you design a weapon, reference a warhead, and never write that warhead, you deserve a crash and it is an important part of learning.
If you did write the warhead, it is important that you can find, identify and fix the issue, rather than having some wannabe-HAL doing guesswork on your code in the background.



All in all, your post is a prime example of how not to do it.
From the unexplained, unqualified claims that the tool "need improvemts" (sic), that it "need some more work" (sic), over the fact that you are willingly infecting your game with known bug-ridden software and then claim the INI Checker needs more work, to the clear implication that your modding skills are non-existent in the first place, and that many of the issues you list wouldn't be issues if you just sat down and thought about what you are doing for a second, garnished by spelling that should be impossible in an age of inbuilt spell checkers, and spiced by a surprising lack of politeness, there is nothing in your post you got "right" in any way. You didn't even manage to choose the correct forum area to post in.

Go and fix your code.
Once you're down to 1 or 2 bugs that you can't find, and you weren't able to track them to simple, recurring situations, and you can be 100% sure the random crashes aren't due to the fact that you use NPatch, then you can come back and, in a friendly, non-dismissive matter, ask for a few more checking modes to be implemented to help you.

But as long as it's obvious that the problems are you and your modding environment, there is no need to fix the tool.

[Beowulf]

I agree it could do with some improvements and DCoder has agreed with that himself, but for the large part, the Checker has always helped me eliminate a lot of typos and other errors before releases and betas and spared me hours of bug hunting.

By and large, it's a very effective tool for RA2 and its expansion.

Besides, the NPatch can fuck off with it causing unexplainable errors.

[DCoder]

Please keep in mind that the INI Checker hasn't been updated since 2004. It can't be expected to support everything the community has learned since then.

When you press, the "Check" button, there should be diffrence/more options:
- Check if weapon dont exist on unit/bulding
- Check if a projectile is missing
- Check if a warhead is missing
- Check if there is a code that is misspelled/dont exist

Already works.

- Check if a Deathweapon is missing

Valid complaint.

Also:
- Be able to fix problem itself, exempel if some warhead exist in [Warheads] but not anywere else, it should be erased

Not a chance.

- Save all errors in a txt file(so you can use the search funktion, I got like 1000 errors)

If you get 1000 errors, a search function is the least of your worries. But yes, that list is hard to use.

- Handle Npatchs new armor types and countries

No. No, no, no.

Bottom line, I doubt I'll really update it, if anything, I'd rewrite it from scratch, but that would require time, and lots of it. I wrote INI Checker during my last year of high school, when free time was a lot easier to get. Nowadays, I have a full time job, and also do most of the coding for Ares. As much as I'd like to make the INI Checker useful again, I don't have enough free time to do that and everything else.

Administrative Notice:

Also, vroom vroom moved.

[~Guest~]

When you press, the "Check" button, there should be diffrence/more options:
- Check if weapon dont exist on unit/bulding
- Check if a projectile is missing
- Check if a warhead is missing
- Check if there is a code that is misspelled/dont exist

Already works.

Read the first sentense of my quote. Honestly that is the only importat thing that need to be added imo


Also Ren, 0_o

Besides, the NPatch can fuck off with it causing unexplainable errors.

Dont go offtopic, if you dont like NPatch you can go to revora and complain non-stop

[DCoder]

What good are those options going to do? All the things you listed are causes for IE, and it's not like you save a lot of time by (de)activating them?

And no, we don't like NPatch.

[Renegade]

When you press, the "Check" button, there should be diffrence/more options:
- Check if weapon dont exist on unit/bulding
- Check if a projectile is missing
- Check if a warhead is missing
- Check if there is a code that is misspelled/dont exist

Already works.

Read the first sentense of my quote. Honestly that is the only importat thing that need to be added imo

Read the only sentence of his quote. That stuff has already been added.

Also Ren, 0_o

What? Had you read and followed what I said, your posts in this thread would be more relevant as well.

Stop bitching about INI Checker and instead go clean up both your mod and your game. Then try again.

Dont go offtopic, if you dont like NPatch you can go to revora and complain non-stop

Someone who posts about general design issues of D's tools in the RA2/YR modding area rather than D's tool shack doesn't get to tell people not to go off topic.

Besides, his comment is actually rather relevant to the topic at hand, because, as said before, NPatch is a buggy piece of shit, and numerous of your problems could be related to it.

In case you didn't grasp that from my first post, I'll explain it again: You are in no position to judge the capability of the INI Checker, because your installation is tainted by NPatch. You could have a perfectly fine INI, the game crashes because you use NPatch Piece of Crap 2007 GoldRed Winter Snow Christmas Summer Deluxe++ Mega 2008 Platinum Edition, and you'd go cry "INI Checker needs to be fixed! It doesn't find all errors!".

NPatch is on topic. As long as you purposefully install a bug generator in your game, you cannot objectively judge INI Checker's effectiveness, because you have no way of knowing whether your errors are due to an INI flaw undetected by INI Checker, or because of NPatch.

[~Guest~]

damn man Ren you are an idiot, I post some suggestions to DCoder, and from no were you come and attack me
The one who is bitching and whining is you.
And this topic is NOT about NPatch, fuck NPatch dont metion it again

[Lt Albrecht]

damn man Ren you are an idiot, I post some suggestions to DCoder, and from no were you come and attack me
The one who is bitching and whining is you.
And this topic is NOT about NPatch, fuck NPatch dont metion it again

(F*A/I-L)^REN^
Yeah, you failed to the power of Renegade, that's bad...

LOL, you do realise renegade is the owner/admin of tis site, right? Also. he's doing it because Dcoder has FAR better things to do with his time than cater to your whims. And actually, he did answer you but you practically ignored him. He said one or two things would be done if he didn't have muuch more important things to do.

[DCoder]

That's it. Rationalize your "most important change", Mr. Guest, or shut up.

When you press, the "Check" button, there should be diffrence/more options:
Honestly that is the only importat thing that need to be added imo

What good are those options going to do? All the things you listed are causes for IE, and it's not like you save a lot of time by (de)activating them?

[Renegade]

Yes...I am sure the admin of a forum is coming "from nowhere"...especially to bad, misplaced, misinformed, senseless posts.

Also, little reality check:

• Half of your feature suggestions have, according to the author, been in the tool for at least 5 years
  
• Your direct "new" suggestions are obviously infeasible and only serve to deteriorate the quality of the tool
  
• You were incapable of finding the boldly labeled "DCoder's Coding Realm"
  
• After multiple posts by multiple people, you still don't grasp that your use of NPatch has all but invalidated your post, because you are basically admitting to having a random error generator in your game, thus making NPatch very much on topic
  

...and you call me an idiot?

Once more, since maybe enough repetition will get it through your skull:

• Your mod is broken by default because you use NPatch.
  
• Your mod is broken beyond recognition anyway, because if it wasn't, you wouldn't get 1000 errors.
  
• If your mod is that broken, the central problem are you and your coding abilities, not INI Checker's ability to find and correct the errors.
  
• Half of your suggestions are worthless, because they're already in there.
  
• Most of the others are worthless because they are either a) not programatically possible, or b) would be just plain dumb or undesirable.
  

So, Mr. oh-so-cool guest: You have two options. You can either finally realize DCoder is talking to you, and try to make a case for your retarded suggestions, or you can listen to me, fix your goddamn mod, and then try to run INI Checker on something that qualifies as an INI, rather than random characters saved as one.

But rest assured, insulting people is getting you nowhere.

(In case there was any doubt about it, this guest is subject to the second and tenth commandment.)

[~Guest~]

If I get a IE, I check the EIP and get 00772A98. Then I go to modenc and check the DCoders EIP List and se that there is something wrong with a projectile. Then would it be easy if it looked like this:

[MRMIdAS]

CTRL+F

PROJECTILE=

???

PROFIT!

[Renegade]

We should harvest his skull.

The marketers of Kevlar will pay us a fortune for a truly impenetrable material.

[DCoder]

Food for thought:
I've seen two imperial fucktons of excepts with that exact EIP where people swore up and down that their Projectiles were all intact and the checker couldn't find any issues either. One thing they all had in common? They were running NPatch.

Also, let's see if images can do what words failed to.

---

It already detects the Weapons, Projectiles and Warheads referenced by the ingame objects.

---