IRC logs for #openttd.dev on OFTC at 2012-10-20
⏴ go to previous day
01:04:25 *** Goldobsidian has joined #openttd.dev
07:59:14 <Terkhen> what are the ./configure options used when building stable releases? is there anything I'm missing besides --disable-assert?
08:02:19 *** Zuu has joined #openttd.dev
08:44:09 *** Alberth has joined #openttd.dev
08:44:09 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v Alberth
09:20:26 *** frosch123 has joined #openttd.dev
09:20:26 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v frosch123
10:10:12 <planetmaker> one thing you can't configure is the newgrf version's release bit
10:10:33 <planetmaker> but I doubt it plays a role there
10:10:56 <planetmaker> iirc the optimization flag is higher than for nightly
10:13:23 <Terkhen> hmm... ok, I'll try that, thanks
10:19:35 *** LordAro has joined #openttd.dev
10:19:35 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v LordAro
10:22:28 <planetmaker> Terkhen, I just tried to reproduce but fail to do so as well (linux x64)
10:23:08 <Terkhen> I see, then it's probably a windows only issue
10:23:15 <Terkhen> let's see what I find
12:52:44 *** Dans34 has joined #openttd.dev
13:29:44 *** Dans34 has left #openttd.dev
13:36:15 *** Zuu has joined #openttd.dev
17:24:33 *** FLHerne has joined #openttd.dev
17:48:19 *** Webster has joined #openttd.dev
17:48:19 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v Webster
19:44:00 <planetmaker> so, with the bancrupting thing: do we want other interest than normal on negative cash? (Not really needed...)
19:44:46 <planetmaker> the interest you pay on a loan now
19:45:00 <planetmaker> whatever that is depends a bit on difficulty level
19:47:04 <Alberth> + * In order to prevent cheating or abuse (just not paying interest by not
19:47:05 <Alberth> + * taking a loan we make companies pay interest on negative cash as well
19:47:30 <Alberth> claims differently, also it misses a ) and the */ should be on the previous line
19:48:33 <planetmaker> claims differently? No. It states that we collect interest on negative cash (now), too
19:48:51 <planetmaker> the ) should be after loan)
19:49:06 <Alberth> c->bankrupt_asked = 0; <-- nice, with a bitmask :)
19:50:29 <planetmaker> what should we do to reset it?
19:51:00 <Alberth> only its own bit would be my guess
19:52:26 <planetmaker> well. You actually want to cancel the whole process of selling off the company. So everything needs reset there, I'd argue
19:53:14 <Alberth> case 10: are the added { and } needed?
19:53:47 <Alberth> CompanyMask bankrupt_asked; ///< which companies were asked about buying it? <-- according to patch 3 at least :)
19:54:34 <planetmaker> the { } are not needed. Actually I added them for sake of consistency
19:55:39 <Alberth> I wonder whether a if else if else if else would not be nicer
19:56:20 <Alberth> ie there are only 3 cases out of 12 or so
19:57:38 <Alberth> - * monthly fee, but on average it will be exact.
19:57:38 <Alberth> + * monthly fee, but on average it will be exact. <-- change this in the 1st patch, so the 3rd does not need to
19:58:08 <planetmaker> yes. Just noticed that inconsistency, too :-)
19:58:57 <Alberth> + c->months_of_bankruptcy = 3* c->months_of_bankruptcy; <-- s/3*/3 */ in afterload
20:00:41 <Alberth> + * (if it still had value after 6 months)
20:00:42 <Alberth> + */ <-- above case 10, */ should be at the previous line
20:01:45 <Alberth> If you like normal English sentences as comment you're missing a few dots :)
20:02:31 <planetmaker> :-) I'll add them then. I guess I like sentences in code. Unlike... on IRC :-P
20:03:04 <Alberth> -Change: Check for bancruptcy monthly to make it harder to accidentially bancrupt your company <-- I wonder whether that is true
20:03:22 <planetmaker> I could leave out the reasoning ;-)
20:03:29 <planetmaker> might be better :-P
20:04:24 <planetmaker> and general: sensible change in your eyes?
20:04:36 <planetmaker> not codewise, but feature-wise?
20:04:39 <Alberth> if(c->money < 0){ <--- 2 spaces too few
20:05:30 <Alberth> it makes some sense to be less paranoid about 0, but not much imho
20:06:01 <Alberth> that if is in patch 2
20:06:43 <planetmaker> well 0 or <= 0... but we don't want to pay interest on cash. So we have to check
20:07:05 <Alberth> for new users it may be slightly different though
20:07:47 <planetmaker> what might be different for them?
20:08:30 <Alberth> They seem to be able to get bancrupt
20:08:59 <Alberth> whether that is by accident, or because they hit the bottom, I don't know :p
20:09:50 <Alberth> First patch is not a change imho, but a feature, as it modifies game play
20:09:54 <planetmaker> oh, it's feasible to bancrupt, no worries. Just toy around with a base cost grf and see where your line of bancruptcy is ;-)
20:10:25 <Alberth> - _economy.max_loan <-- I wonder about that space
20:11:23 <Alberth> patch 2 is also a feature imho
20:12:07 <planetmaker> hm. I'd rather "feature" patch 2 than patch 1. One changes existing behaviour but doesn't do really anything new (from my POV)
20:12:29 <Alberth> it is all quite borderline :)
20:12:44 <planetmaker> or I combine them (1 and 2)
20:12:51 <planetmaker> but... I like atomicity
20:13:05 <Alberth> yeah, merging seems wrong to me
20:13:13 <Alberth> no further comments from me
20:13:20 <planetmaker> thanks for review, Alberth :-)
20:13:54 <planetmaker> it also helped me with one thing: getting familiar with hg's evolve extension :D
20:14:12 <Alberth> oh, you tried it? how did it work?
20:14:39 <Alberth> I am not sure I like it; I tend to edit patch files directly :p
20:15:01 <planetmaker> you basically commit patches as normal.
20:15:24 <planetmaker> If you want to change a patch, you just update to it, edit code and use hg amend
20:15:38 <planetmaker> after amending that patch, you use hg evolve to rebase the patches based on it
20:15:59 <planetmaker> with the added benefit (or bane) that the now obsolete old changesets remain technically available
20:16:08 <planetmaker> (they're hidden after successfully evolved)
20:16:35 <Alberth> that would be the main gain imho, your patches are also in the repo
20:17:05 <planetmaker> when you amend patch 1, you have other patches unstable, thus as for the previous version. You immediately see how and where they belong. also good
20:17:21 <planetmaker> and your current commit knows which his children are, so evolve works also anytime
20:18:23 <planetmaker> it's handy. But evolve is not yet distributed with mercurial and the extension only works for hg 2.3+
20:18:38 <Alberth> is it also smart in avoiding patch rejects? I often get rejects because I edited a line that is simply copied in a next patch
20:18:48 <planetmaker> it uses the normal merge mechanism
20:19:02 <planetmaker> thus it's better than mq
20:19:29 <planetmaker> and you could specify another merge mechanism, if you wanted
20:19:30 <Alberth> hmm, I only have hg 2.2.3
20:19:41 <planetmaker> I cloned crew repo to test ;-)
20:19:44 <Alberth> like you ever want to do that :)
20:20:08 <planetmaker> indeed, I never had the desire to re-specify merge mechanism
20:20:20 <planetmaker> though... it also allows to specify like "always take this branch"
20:20:28 <planetmaker> which might be what you want sometimes
20:21:15 <Alberth> iirc, the gui merger apps use that mechanism to get the patch they need to merge
20:21:44 <planetmaker> maybe. I know little about that :-)
20:23:53 <planetmaker> oh, and you have hg gup and hg gdown - analog to hg qpush and qpop
20:29:10 <Terkhen> evolve sounds interesting
20:33:50 <planetmaker> it's actually written to replace mq :-)
20:34:05 <planetmaker> (among other things)
20:35:44 <planetmaker> Alberth, mind if I keep the case? I'm not conviced that I like a long if then else better
20:44:40 * planetmaker ponders to commit those three patches now. Anyone object to monthly bancruptcy check and interest on negative cash?
21:26:58 *** Alberth has left #openttd.dev
22:23:20 *** FLHerne has joined #openttd.dev
continue to next day ⏵