Working on a fork of OpenTTD

iNVERTED · Post by **iNVERTED** » 21 Mar 2007 06:37

Screw it. I can't be arsed to post here any more when people only want to shout at me.

jonty-comp · Post by **jonty-comp** » 21 Mar 2007 07:32

That's a real pity, as I for one was looking forward to your work, and it appears it has been ruined somewhat by some steadfast complainers.

DeletedUser21 · Post by **DeletedUser21** » 21 Mar 2007 08:45

jonty-comp wrote:That's a real pity, as I for one was looking forward to your work, and it appears it has been ruined somewhat by some steadfast complainers.

Agreed,

Why can't we just accept his choises of programming, even if he wants to reinvent the bycicle, it doesn't matter, maybe it will be a better bycicle maybe not. Just let him do his work and stop the jabbering about coding styles/formating.

I think it will be good!

DaleStan · Post by **DaleStan** » 21 Mar 2007 09:16

iNVERTED wrote:I can't be arsed to post here any more when people only want to shout at me.

I think you're trying to get me to shut up without actually having one of us concede the point. If I don't have a point, challenge. If I do, concede. I (and, I expect, most other people here) will interpret your silence as the latter.

Mr. X wrote:even if he wants to reinvent the bycicle, it doesn't matter, maybe it will be a better bycicle maybe not. Just let him do his work and stop the jabbering about coding styles/formating.

I still don't see why GNU indent is not an option for the coding style problem. As for re-inventing the bicycle, Bob still hasn't specified whether XDA is supposed to replace the GRF container or the NFO language, so I can't say much about the likelihood of his bicycle being better than the current one.

PouncingAnt · Post by **PouncingAnt** » 21 Mar 2007 10:48

Dalestan, you don't need to say anything about it being better or worse, thats the whole point. The fact is, he's not using GRF, thus there actually isnt any need to discuss it. He has already made the decision, and he's set upon it. This thread is going to die from these arguments, so we'd best tone it down, I think.

Wolf01 · Post by **Wolf01** » 21 Mar 2007 10:51

iNVERTED wrote:Screw it. I can't be arsed to post here any more when people only want to shout at me.

i'm still with the idea that your purpose is nice, and if i remember well, they said nothing for the OTTD challenge spinoff which changes a big part of the game

maquinista · Post by **maquinista** » 21 Mar 2007 11:20

I think that this is a good idea. It will have some interesting features, and if someone likes it for OTTD, he can recode it into OTTD code.

I think that NFO coding, is very difficult, and something easier will be a good feature.

iNVERTED · Post by **iNVERTED** » 21 Mar 2007 11:28

What I meant by my last post was: If and when I release something I will post here again, but for now I might as well not bother continuing to argue.

Bob still hasn't specified whether XDA is supposed to replace the GRF container or the NFO language

XDA will be used not only for GRF files (i.e. BOTH the GRF container AND the NFO language), but also in the future for savegames, scenarios, etc.

phil88 · Post by **phil88** » 21 Mar 2007 11:29

This truly is an opensource community at it's best.

People, it's openttd. The code is open for anyone to do whatever the hell they like with it (pretty much). If he wants to create his own fork that breaks the main trunk's coding style and adds a bunch of stuff that a lot of people would consider risky, or bump up the system requirements a far bit for whatever reason, who cares? It happens all the time, the coding style in the current trunk isn't objectively the correct one. It is allowed to change to how the programmer wants. Granted the trunk devs have the right to not include code they don't want, but they sure can't stop other people from creating a fork. That's the whole point of opensource.

So I say, go for it, good luck. Ignore the whiners.

richk67 · Post by **richk67** » 21 Mar 2007 11:55

Hey, I didnt say dont do it... I just said that noone should assume it will have any bearing on anything in trunk.

I think it is always good for more programmers to learn more about OTTD internals. My own C++ coding has improved infinitely as a result of coding for OTTD. I expect iNVERTED will learn tons, and produce better patches as a result.

charlieg · Post by **charlieg** » 21 Mar 2007 13:01

Well the proposed features look interesting. I hope you do work on this and release something.

Be sure to keep an eye on OpenTTD improvements and sync them with your work (and vice-versa if you find any problems).

Bot_40 · Post by **Bot_40** » 21 Mar 2007 13:58

iNVERTED wrote:Screw it. I can't be arsed to post here any more when people only want to shout at me.

Instead of throwing a hissy fit, why don't you just act mature and say "I've already decided I'm doing it this way for coding practice/fun/whatever reason. Thanks for the input, but it's not needed"

Then the discussion is over and there was no need for anybody to "win" or "lose".

DaleStan · Post by **DaleStan** » 21 Mar 2007 18:53

iNVERTED wrote:XDA will be used not only for GRF files (i.e. BOTH the GRF container AND the NFO language)

How do you intend to implement this?

GRF contains both sprites, which can only sanely be edited with a image processing program, and arbitrary "things". These "things" are, according to the NFO spec, either byte-coded instructions, which can only be edited with a text editor, or embedded binary data[0], which can only sanely edited the program that generated them. If XDA instructions do not exist, XDA becomes a very poor replacement for NFO, and if the XDA container does not actually contain the sprites and binary data, it isn't a container at all.

Are you planning to write your own program that is a text editor, an image editor, an audio editor, &c.? Obviously, being a binary format, you'll have to write something to convert from "human readable" to XDA, but this seems like overkill.

(I'm not asking any questions here that wouldn't have to be answered anyway; I'm just making sure that you answer the hard questions first, before you waste too much of your time on all the thousands of easy questions.)

[0] Usually audio clips. Other things (embedded 32bpp PNG sprites, for example) are also a possibility. Technically, the recolor tables are also embedded binary data, but I'm not sure what tool is best for editing them.

dev|ant · Post by **dev|ant** » 21 Mar 2007 19:13

DaleStan wrote:Are you planning to write your own program that is a text editor, an image editor, an audio editor, &c.?

Sure he is. No really...

Other stuff...

Given that Inverted already has XDA working for adding his own sprites, he's obviously miles ahead of anything else mentioned. That he's done it without learning the intricacies of grfs and nfos is something to be applauded, not put down.

DaleStan · Post by **DaleStan** » 21 Mar 2007 19:24

dev|ant wrote:Given that Inverted already has XDA working for adding his own sprites, he's obviously miles ahead of anything else mentioned.

Given that the 32bpp team already has tar working for adding their own sprites, they're obviously miles ahead of ... Waitaminute. That's not true at all, is it?

There is no (documented) way to use the 32 bpp tar format to adjust vehicle properties or names, implement variational or random graphics, add or change sound effects, &c. But by your logic, since they can do simple sprite replacements ...

iNVERTED · Post by **iNVERTED** » 21 Mar 2007 20:36

DaleStan wrote:GRF contains both sprites, which can only sanely be edited with a image processing program, and arbitrary "things". These "things" are, according to the NFO spec, either byte-coded instructions, which can only be edited with a text editor, or embedded binary data[0], which can only sanely edited the program that generated them. If XDA instructions do not exist, XDA becomes a very poor replacement for NFO, and if the XDA container does not actually contain the sprites and binary data, it isn't a container at all.

The XDA files do not contain the images themselves. The images are stored, as I said earlier, in BMP format, to be changed to PNG format, in a file with the same name as the XDA file (minus extension of course). The XDA file contains the equivalent of NFO instructions. XDA is one-to-one convertable with XML, so if you want to edit your XDA file, you convert it to XML which is human-readable, edit, convert back - practically the same as using grfcodec to encode an NFO. Alternatively, you can use a generic XDA editor, allowing you to edit the XDA file directly in a GUI.

Are you planning to write your own program that is a text editor, an image editor, an audio editor, &c.?

Yes, which is what Fusion is. tech notes on Fusion

DaleStan · Post by **DaleStan** » 22 Mar 2007 01:27

Inverted wrote:The XDA files do not contain the images themselves.

DaleStan wrote:if the XDA "container" does not actually contain the sprites and binary data, it isn't a container at all.

Inverted wrote:The images are stored, as I said earlier, in BMP format, to be changed to PNG format, in a file with the same name as the XDA file (minus extension of course).

And you have some graceful way of dying when the corresponding image file is missing/can't be opened, or when the XDA meta-data calls for a sprite that's outside the bounds of the image, right? Audio snippets will, I assume go into a .wav, .ogg, or .mp3 file of the same name, but where will you pack the arbitrary binary data?

Inverted wrote:The XDA file contains the equivalent of NFO instructions. XDA is one-to-one convertable with XML,

Code: Select all

<peter1138> there is a reason it's not in xml
<peter1138> anyone who takes the time to fully understand the system so they can write an xml structure realises it's not worth it

Korenn · Post by **Korenn** » 23 Mar 2007 16:43

DaleStan wrote:

Code: Select all

<peter1138> there is a reason it's not in xml
<peter1138> anyone who takes the time to fully understand the system so they can write an xml structure realises it's not worth it

I agree that XML is not the holy grail of metadata formatting, but dismissing it out of hand is just as stupid as praising it to the heavens.

Mucht · Post by **Mucht** » 17 Apr 2007 19:07

Hi,

any news on this "fork"?

jasperthecat1 · Post by **jasperthecat1** » 13 May 2007 10:56

i like all ideas

- Long train depots (depots must be as long as the train and depot is accessible from both ends, so trains can drive through)
- Brand new GUI for building things
- Diagonal roads
- Traffic lights on roads
- Civilian cars on roads
- Bridges and tunnels for canals (though they would be damn expensive)
- Custom airports - place spare land, runways, hangars, terminals, loading bays and jetties
- Design tool (ie. copy and paste)
- New railtype - vacuum tubes
- Bridges over bridges, bridges with corners and tunnels with corners
- Four- and six-lane roads
- Curved tracks and roads
- Rotate the view
- Different gradient slopes
- RCT-style water (i.e. different depths of water that cost different amounts of money to "reclaim" as land)
- Diagonal stations
- Conveyor belts

Transport Tycoon Forums

Working on a fork of OpenTTD

Interesting

Who is online