IRC logs for #openttd on OFTC at 2023-01-30
⏴ go to previous day
00:04:56 *** Wormnest has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
00:42:52 *** Wormnest has joined #openttd
00:47:08 *** Soni has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
01:35:38 *** Wormnest has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
02:13:20 *** Wormnest has joined #openttd
02:14:20 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
02:36:57 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
03:04:30 *** Wormnest has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
04:06:53 *** debdog has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
06:03:46 *** keikoz has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
07:35:44 *** sla_ro|master has joined #openttd
07:43:38 *** D-HUND is now known as debdog
07:54:29 <andythenorth[d]> is there a method to re-init a GS on a savegame?
07:54:50 <andythenorth[d]> I can make my own inside the GS with a story page button
07:55:24 <andythenorth[d]> but maybe something already exists
07:57:20 * andythenorth[d] trying to find where in OpenTTD a call is made to GS `function MainClass::Init()`
07:59:14 *** supermop_toil_ has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
09:08:58 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
09:20:26 <petern> Dear CMake VS Code extension: do not assume all my projects should use CMake...
09:42:31 <andythenorth[d]> I wonder if there's a way to reset a GS by roundtripping via .sav -> .scn -> .sav
09:42:35 <andythenorth[d]> didn't figure it out yet
09:44:31 <andythenorth[d]> want to (1) clear out all existing GS data in save / memory, (2) call the GS init, with the opcode allowance
09:44:46 <andythenorth[d]> only for debug, not for general player use
10:15:07 <petern> You'd think switching GS would do it...
10:23:36 <andythenorth[d]> it might, but I might not know 🙂
11:16:02 <Samu> prospecting water industries on clearable watered objects should fail? yes or no?
11:41:58 *** Xaroth5 has joined #openttd
11:48:59 <petern> Does "clearable" just mean "not like the default transmitter"?
11:49:10 *** Xaroth has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
11:51:17 <JGR> It means OBJECT_FLAG_AUTOREMOVE, mostly
11:55:39 <petern> OBJECT_FLAG_AUTOREMOVE
11:55:39 <petern> Object get automatically removed (like "owned land").
11:55:44 <petern> So correct, it should fail.
12:07:52 <Samu> but prospecting is as OWNER_TOWN
12:11:32 <Samu> im so bad at describing my code :(
12:14:14 <petern> Objects have an owner, so I think the autoremove flag should only mean that it will autoremove for the owner.
12:17:21 <Samu> OWNER_TOWN can't remove objects
12:17:48 <Samu> and I am trying to decide wether they should, and i think they shouldn't
12:18:26 <Samu> the prospecting as OWNER_TOWN dilema
12:23:55 <glx[d]> Industries are never company owned, so they should not affect company owned stuff
12:24:54 <FLHerne> Samu: Probably the most common of company-owned land is to block town expansion
12:25:21 <FLHerne> OBJECT_FLAG_AUTOREMOVE is equivalent to that so should also do so
12:46:49 *** phil[m] has quit IRC (Quit: Client limit exceeded: 20000)
12:51:52 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
12:55:04 <andythenorth[d]> glx[d]: 'currently'
12:55:08 <andythenorth[d]> I have ideas 😛
13:22:25 <dihedral> are there any linux sysadmins in here by any chance?
13:24:20 <petern> Not that will admit to it.
13:29:01 *** debdog has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
13:40:54 <Samu> oh snap, there's also OWNER_DEITY
13:41:17 <Samu> prospects as OWNER_TOWN, but is founded by OWNER_DEITY
13:45:10 <Samu> if an industry if prospected and it happens to end up on a canal from some company, should the OWNER_DEITY bypass the ownership test?
13:45:57 <Samu> in other words, should a GS be able to prospect industries on canals owned by some company?
13:46:26 <Samu> because currently, it can't
13:46:55 <Samu> even if the canal is OWNER_NONE, since it's not equal to OWNER_DEITY, will also fail on canals with no owners
13:47:30 <Samu> wait, it actually doesn't check them
13:47:41 <Samu> it can build on top of OWNER_NONE
13:49:37 <Samu> yeah, it bypasses CheckOwnership
14:00:59 <FLHerne> at least not deliberately
14:01:35 <FLHerne> *at least it shouldn't by random prospecting; deliberately choosing to build there might be acceptable
14:02:52 *** supermop_Home has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
14:07:03 <Samu> alright, think i got this under control
14:10:35 <Samu> OWNER_DEITY check right at the line 1
14:23:07 *** D-HUND has quit IRC (Quit: Initiating getting-the-hell-out-of-here maneuver!)
14:23:41 <Samu> im renaming is_water to is_canal
14:23:59 <Samu> and even then, it should be a bit more specific
14:24:26 <Samu> is_canal_without_an_object_on_it
14:54:43 <petern> Industries shouldn't be built on canals.
14:56:40 <andythenorth[d]> my floating water wheel disagrees
14:56:49 <andythenorth[d]> also my narrow-boat based grow op
15:17:16 <Samu> this is why it's complicated
15:26:12 <andythenorth[d]> Samu, not wanting to gatekeep you, but have you wandered into a rabbit hole again? 🙂
15:26:20 <andythenorth[d]> do we need to prospect industry on canal?
15:38:45 <Rubidium> dihedral: depends on the scale of linux sysadmin you're after ;)
15:47:27 <FLHerne> to be fair, there's clearly a market canalside in the evenings
15:47:59 <FLHerne> people have offered me free weed for a ride on the boat before
15:50:52 *** supermop_toil has joined #openttd
15:50:59 *** gelignite has joined #openttd
16:11:57 *** virtualrandomnumber has joined #openttd
16:12:37 *** birdjj has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
16:26:31 *** virtualrandomnumber has quit IRC (Quit: virtualrandomnumber)
16:42:37 <andythenorth[d]> Samu, also, why?
16:42:48 <andythenorth[d]> is it because the spec permits creating industries with a water tile?
16:52:47 *** Flygon has quit IRC (Quit: A toaster's basically a soldering iron designed to toast bread)
16:59:41 *** HerzogDeXtEr has joined #openttd
17:41:45 <andythenorth[d]> also time for curry soon
18:11:54 *** tokai|noir has joined #openttd
18:11:54 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v tokai|noir
18:18:56 *** tokai has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
18:22:47 <Samu> That comment is still bad :(
18:23:04 <Samu> my weak spot, explaining my code
18:26:13 <LordAro> Samu: don't explain what, explain why
18:26:30 <LordAro> if it's self-evident, it doesn't need a comment
18:27:51 <LordAro> tbh i'd say that comment is more or less fine
18:27:54 <LordAro> doesn't need the first line
18:28:16 <Samu> it's not self evident at all. I am working on canal ownership which makes canals have owners
18:28:45 <Samu> and then various sorts of infrastructure can build over it, while retaining the ownership of the canal
18:29:06 <Samu> the industry case is just the most difficult part
18:29:19 <Samu> it's only related to water industries
18:30:27 <Samu> when funding an industry, i need to check who owns the canal, so i can't just do clear checks as OWNER_TOWN or OWNER_NONE or so, i need to switch temporarily to the company that issued industry construction
18:31:28 <Samu> if the permission is there, an opponent may build an industry on my canal
18:31:29 <glx[d]> why ? The company pays, but won't be the industry owner, so construction should not happen on company owned land
18:37:15 <Samu> on master, if you fund an oil rig on your canals, it builds, it is permited
18:37:51 <Samu> but not on your opponents canals
18:38:33 <Samu> if you prospect, however... no permission
18:38:59 <Samu> because in master, _current_company is OWNER_TOWN for prospecting
18:40:08 <Samu> same as random generation, random generation is OWNER_NONE
18:40:13 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
18:40:43 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
18:40:58 <Samu> I am trying to challenge those rules with a game setting (build on competitor canal)
18:45:39 <DorpsGek> - Update: Translations from eints (by translators)
18:45:42 <FLHerne> (a) OTTD has too many settings
18:45:50 <glx[d]> but prospection is different, as it may fail for many reasons, including bad luck
18:46:09 <FLHerne> (b) given the griefing potential, why would building on competitors' canals ever be a good idea
18:46:52 <glx[d]> so different behaviour for funding or prospecting is not an issue
18:46:55 <FLHerne> I'm not sure that allowing prospecting on canals is a good idea either
18:47:33 <FLHerne> most canals are built for ships, so an industry will be in the way
18:47:53 <FLHerne> if I specifically choose a location on a canal and it's in the way, fine, that's my own fault
18:48:35 <FLHerne> but an industry randomly placed on a canal, as most players build them, is almost guaranteed to block ships
18:49:31 <FLHerne> If I prospect for a water industry, I /don't want/ it to be placed in the middle of one of my canals
18:49:50 <FLHerne> and I'm pretty sure that goes for like 9/10 players
18:50:20 <andythenorth[d]> infra should be common or owned
18:50:24 <andythenorth[d]> if it's owned, it's owned
18:50:29 <andythenorth[d]> the whole tile needs owned
18:50:48 <andythenorth[d]> can't build on otherwise owned tiles
18:51:18 <FLHerne> andythenorth[d]: I think this is about player prospecting for industries
18:51:45 <FLHerne> prospecting an industry on their own canal tile doesn't seem against that in principle
18:52:01 <FLHerne> it just makes no sense from a "does anyone actually intend that to happen" PoV
18:52:27 <andythenorth[d]> stuff and things
18:52:29 *** frosch has quit IRC (Quit: User went offline on Discord a while ago)
18:57:44 <Samu> I'll see what I can do, you opened my eye
19:01:18 *** virtualrandomnumber has joined #openttd
19:01:39 *** virtualrandomnumber has quit IRC ()
19:25:02 <FLHerne> As is common for your patches, I still don't really understand what's wrong with the status quo :p
19:25:59 <FLHerne> currently: direct placement works on same player's canals, fails on competitors' canals, prospecting ignores both?
19:26:21 <FLHerne> is this still partly about GS?
19:26:54 <FLHerne> I think prospecting for GS should ignore all players' canals
19:35:56 <andythenorth[d]> radical proposal: 'bridges'
19:36:52 <andythenorth[d]> maybe I am wrong
19:37:05 <andythenorth[d]> I am currently on a posting-ban in another unrelated forum, so maybe it's me that's wrong
19:40:26 <andythenorth[d]> about everything 🙂
19:49:31 <andythenorth[d]> many of the top results aren't very useful
20:00:41 *** HerzogDeXtEr has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
20:13:52 <Xarick> 13.0-RC2 vs BOCC (Build on Competitor Canal branch)
20:19:03 <petern> That's about as clear as mud.
20:19:48 <Samu> the setting can be turned off, let me check what that results into
20:20:01 <petern> Have you explained what you are trying to achieve?
20:20:40 <petern> Have you explained what problem you are solving?
20:21:07 <Samu> it's to allow ship depots, docks, buoys, etc, on competitor canals
20:21:19 <Samu> but also objects, industries... questionable
20:21:29 <petern> Why should they be allowed on competitor canals?
20:22:19 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
20:22:28 <Samu> because they're like roads
20:22:55 <Samu> competitor ships can walk on my canals
20:23:11 <Samu> so why can't i place a dock, a ship depot
20:23:30 <Samu> the only thing i can place is a lock, i think
20:24:50 <nielsm> "right of access" and "right of construction" are kind of different though
20:25:24 <petern> TBH it's pretty weird that we allow building road stops on top of someone else's road.
20:25:33 <petern> I don't think it should be extended to canals.
20:27:19 <Samu> there is a setting to disable road stops on competitor
20:27:36 <Samu> i was doing precisely the same, but for canals, with a setting and all
20:28:19 <TallTyler> I agree. I'd consider roads differently because towns build them, and players often extend a town's grid system to allow the town to grow (especially if towns are not allowed to build roads). It makes some sense to allow stops on competitors' roads.
20:28:19 <TallTyler> Canals are much more expensive than roads and are not built by towns. I'd consider them closer to train tracks than roads.
20:28:55 <glx[d]> yeah canals should stay as they are
20:29:22 <nielsm> it's probably best to go find the commit where that setting to allow/deny building road stops on competitor owned roads was introduced, and see what the justification behind the change was back then
20:29:32 <Samu> but the lock is already allowed
20:30:28 <Rubidium> what about the industry making the canal tiles impassible, whereas that's not the case for road stops?
20:31:24 <glx[d]> same for ship depot, in the right orientation you can block traffic
20:32:35 <nielsm> road stops can prevent extending the road in one axis, and it adds pathfinder penalty to the tile, but it doesn't make it impassable at least
20:42:28 <TallTyler> Unless a road vehicle is stopped in the station (loading, timetabled, or just stopped). Vehicles can't pass in stations.
20:45:18 *** gelignite has quit IRC (Quit: Stay safe!)
20:45:28 <glx[d]> oh for roads it's also because trams
20:47:15 <glx[d]> but road tiles are really special as they have multiple owners
20:56:59 *** Wormnest has joined #openttd
20:57:02 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
21:00:55 <michi_cc[d]> How nice this is somebody else's ™️ fault 😛
21:20:21 <Samu> i wish i could prospect exactly on the location i want, just for debugging purposes
21:39:58 *** Wormnest has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
21:43:36 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
21:43:43 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
21:45:52 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
21:46:00 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
21:46:04 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
21:46:05 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
21:51:56 *** keikoz has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
22:02:57 *** Wormnest has joined #openttd
22:36:32 <Samu> i know, i know, griefing and such, i need to re-think the logic, but for now I wated to have something working.
22:39:53 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
22:40:03 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
22:41:01 *** nielsm has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
22:41:19 <TallTyler> Not just griefing, why would you want an industry to prospect in a canal?
22:41:42 <TallTyler> Or are you still working on building on competitors’ locks?
22:45:57 <Samu> building on competitors' lock?
22:46:48 <Samu> master currently allows locks on competitor's canals. Are you saying i should make a PR to deny that?
22:57:43 *** Samu has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
23:09:50 *** sla_ro|master has quit IRC ()
23:20:46 <TallTyler> Uh, sorry, meant “competitors’ canals”
23:21:12 *** Wormnest has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
23:22:52 <TallTyler> I have no opinion on that subject, I doubt it’s a situation that is encountered very often
23:23:07 <TallTyler> But it seems like a solution in search of a problem
23:52:16 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
23:52:18 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
continue to next day ⏵
