RockPatch 1.08 - Preview

[DCoder]

With regard to the new GUI checkbox, maybe this opens up the possibility of adding a DisableableFromShell2= to the menu,

<!-- random thought follows -->

A generic solution would be

Code:

[NewCheckboxes]
0=MyCheckbox
1=MinorSW

[MyCheckbox]
UIName=GUI:Boop

[unitX]
DisabledBy=MyCheckbox

[unitY]
Requires=MinorSW

or similar...

[pd]

i don't think you can add checkboxes that easily at runtime, would be far too complicated

[Marshall]

I can imagine. What about adding several predefined checkboxes that can be made visible at runtime if the mod dictates it?

Code:

[NewCheckboxes] ;default is not visible
0=Visible ;DisableableFromShell2
1=NotVisible ;DisableableFromShell3
2=Visible ;ShroudRegrows

[DCoder]

pd, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't creating them as easy as calling CreateWindow/Ex for each list item?

[pd]

I'm not sure about that, but what about handling routines? positioning? variables? etc etc...

[VK]

pd, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't creating them as easy as calling CreateWindow/Ex for each list item?

Because it is not simple Check Box is Check Box with OwnerDraw and it should be registered in the controls table

The best way to intercept the message on creation of dialogue and to add it there before init OwnerDraw sub-system

At last the best way - to make it as HTML (using IWebBrowser2 for example)
But it is very difficult...

i stated this somewhere once, the patch is going to use rp.csf as its stringtable.
I planned to make it use rp.mix as its mix file, but I dunno yet whether I could get it working. I should be able to, thoguh

Simple addition of a code of loading similar RA2MD.MIX does not work?

[Renegade]

Thou shalt not double-post.

[Bobingabout]

how the hell is he suposed to know the forum rules anyway, the links been gone since you updated from the awsome old board to this crappy 1, and he registered long after that.

[DCoder]

No, it hasn't, it's still under "Help" - "The Basic Rules".

(I have to agree on the "crappy" factor, though.)

[Renegade]

Maybe "I am the Ren thy Admin" wasn't as catching as it could have been. Nevertheless, just because he didn't the rules doesn't make them invalid...do you know all your country's laws? A simple search for rules would have sufficed. Then maybe he would've been unable to filter out modding-related threads by headline. So he'd have gotten all despaired and would've looked for something to help him...clickz0rz Help...OMFG look! An entire section rules!

That is, if we assume he actually tried to find the forum rules...which we all know is not the case.



P.S.: There was also a quote in STX's intro to network services...

...that in the same line, the link „Help“ leads to a page where not only you are
helped with certain standard tasks of the forum, but also our rules are saved?

[pd]

k, to get ontopic again:

ImmunityTypes are done.
VeteranGetsBounty=yes/no and EliteGetsBounty=yes/no are added.
To the lazy people: there will be no global flag for that right now. There's copy-and-paste, remember? You might even be able to use search+replace if you got an editor that supports multi-line replacements...

I'll be focussed on bugfixes now, and look what I can do. I can't promise everything will get fixed.
For instance, I can't fix train bridges, since I neither got knowledge about how bridges work nor what jonwil did to add train bridges. I'll have to look into them when I know more about overlay and tile stuff and so on. Sorry to the people who wanted to use it.

[Blade]

Is it possible that you could undo what Jonwil did so that wood bridges work correctly? With the current patch installed, even if you don't have the TX, wood bridges can't be repaired.

[pd]

yes, that is possible.
maybe it's even better.

what I have to know though if everybody agrees with this, I don't know whether the feature is used at all.
once I know more about overlay, tiles, and so on I might be able to throw a look into all this again.

oh, and I want to be sure that jonwil doesn't feel offended if I remove this.

[Marshall]

For the sake of stability and completeness, I think it is more correct to leave a new feature out, than to break an original feature.
Hopefully Jonwil's work will help lead to fully working train bridges in future.

[DJBREIT]

I agree, It is better to record and remove it then to leave it and have it cause problems.