Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Josh @ Dreamland

General ENIGMA / Re: Question about audio:none
« on: June 14, 2014, 09:10:56 pm »
Every system type, yes. It'd be hard to mock the collision and networking systems in a useful manner, and you'll find the same is true of most extensions. There are plenty of systems out there to automate mocking—Google maintains Mockito, as an example with which I've become very experienced. But this isn't what we need, here. Your instinct is correct, though; we can create a template function or macro whose only job is to take the place of a function that is supposed to load a file or stream and record that it was done.

General ENIGMA / Re: Question about audio:none
« on: June 14, 2014, 01:07:18 pm »
If this is going to be an "every system" thing, we might just call it "Debug." It seems like a good idea to do this sort of logging globally.

Issues Help Desk / Re: Josh! Relieve my penis!!
« on: June 14, 2014, 09:33:15 am »
If I had to guess, you just have that bug where compiler output isn't being redirected properly. I'm told it only affects me, though. I don't know what modifications were made that caused it, and I don't want to dig long enough to track it down.

General ENIGMA / Re: Timelines won't update correctly after saving.
« on: June 14, 2014, 09:14:02 am »
Amazing how we do no caching and still have cache problems. What if you click the green check in the code window? That should almost certainly fix it without reloading LGM.

It may be that the "Save" action is custom-tailored to iterate open dialogs and grab their updated version.

General ENIGMA / Re: Question about audio:none
« on: June 14, 2014, 07:45:30 am »
I think I'd go "Mute," between the two. The point of "None" was to remove all audio functions from the compilation process except the ones the system itself fundamentally depends on. It'd be better if we could find a way to remove all such dependencies, but that's usually a difficult problem.

Issues Help Desk / Re: Error - Invalid assignment to function
« on: June 09, 2014, 09:48:41 pm »
We already do that, dazappa. This relates to naming a variable the same thing as a function. No one would be complaining if the variable behind the problem were called "instance_destroy" instead of "connect," but unfortunately, "connect" names a function as well.

Issues Help Desk / Re: Error - Invalid assignment to function
« on: June 09, 2014, 06:33:15 pm »
It doesn't matter what declared "connect" as a function, the point is that something is. The user-side solution is to just name the variable something else. The ENIGMA-side solution is to only use functions from namespace enigma_user, but I'm not sure we're ready to make that jump.

Issues Help Desk / Re: show_message doesn't work on linux
« on: June 08, 2014, 09:09:01 am »
Yeah, by default, we use raw X11 for creating the window on Linux. Widget programming in X11 is notoriously terrible, so a widgets library for it just hasn't happened. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that that X11 has been "on its way out" for the last eleven years. Now we have Wayland and Mir under development, and motivation to write widgets in X11 has never been lower.

Issues Help Desk / Re: Error - Invalid assignment to function
« on: June 08, 2014, 08:50:48 am »
This is probably because we still aren't using exclusively namespace enigma_user for functions. If I had to guess, connect is some kind of sockets function someone unwittingly included in a header somewhere. The fewer includes we have from the engine, the better, so I'd prefer that be removed even if the ultimate solution is forcing functions to be read from enigma_user.

That's wild. Could you try running it from git bash? I'm not sure where it is getting that "-------" is a file, but if I had to guess, I'd say it's from one of two things:

1) The way command line arguments are being parsed. It's possible something happened that caused parameters to be interpreted as filenames, and then a sort moved all the hyphens to the front. This is unlikely, but....
2) Someone had merge errors before he distributed the zip, and somewhere in the makefile you'll see <<<<<<<<<<<<, ------------ and >>>>>>>>>>>>. I say this is unlikely because Robert doesn't have the same problem, and you said the zip is fresh.

Could you check over the makefiles to look for oddities?

Off-Topic / Re: GM:Studio Standard Now Free
« on: June 07, 2014, 07:43:52 am »
It's too early to tell, but I am thinking this was a great business move on their part. Now people can tinker to their hearts' content without paying, and only people who come up with a decent enough game to warrant a sale have to pay them. I'd be weary of their new license, but that's just me.

This is, however, not a problem for ENIGMA. There is a steep difference between costless (what they immediately appear to be offering) and free. This will show, as hinted above, when it comes time to distribute games. Of course, at present, ENIGMA has a similar issue, but that's been a public work in progress for some time.

Note that I'm not focusing on the splash screen, which is still included at no additional cost. I'm focusing on to whom and for what price you are allowed to distribute their games. They don't seem to publish their EULA online.

Announcements / Re: Licensing, the ultimatum
« on: June 05, 2014, 09:12:07 pm »
If LGPL ENIGMA is not a separable piece of your application, you are breaking the license. As long as LGPL ENIGMA code is separate from the proprietary bits of your engine, you can market our free, continually updated code with your paid, proprietary, potentially malicious extensions that your users would come to rely on.

It is our job to ensure future users CAN choose their own license, and we would like to do so without allowing forks of ENIGMA to leverage proprietary extensions to "trap" users into their proprietary version. The LGPL accomplishes exactly zero of these two goals.

General ENIGMA / Re: Modifying the wiki page on EDL specification
« on: June 05, 2014, 09:03:49 pm »
That page was detailing the new specification, which is mostly implemented in the other branch. Your statements do not apply to it, though they are more relevant for now. I would recommend inserting that before the current paragraph, right under "Arrays."

It'd be good to note that the lvalue-array specification is not currently implemented.

Announcements / Re: Licensing, the ultimatum
« on: June 01, 2014, 09:00:09 pm »
I kept the text in the original post current; that's what was sent, with one exception: I added the word "again" after "Greetings" in case they wondered why I wrote them twice without any acknowledgment of the first time.

Other than that, what you see is what I sent.

Announcements / Re: Licensing, the ultimatum
« on: June 01, 2014, 08:39:14 pm »
I've split the topic where the discussion started that ultimately derailed the original purpose of this thread; you can find it here.

Other relevant information: this letter has been sent. I will update this post/topic when I hear back.