Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[PatrikLundell]

Thanks mifki. That's the same conclusion I came to when I started to look at it. I wrote a script to test it out, and that seemed to work out correctly.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Code: [Select]

function x ()
  local coal = df.builtin_mats.COAL
 
  for i, material in ipairs (df.global.world.raws.inorganics) do
    for k, economic in ipairs (material.economic_uses) do
      for l, product in ipairs (df.global.world.raws.reactions.reactions [economic].products) do
        local mat = dfhack.matinfo.decode (product.mat_type, product.mat_index)
       
        if mat and
           mat.mode == "builtin" and
           mat.type == coal then
          dfhack.println (material.id .. " produces coal")
        end
      end
    end
  end
end

x ()


[Burneddi]

An alternative solution to the fuel thing would be the ability to select multiple items at once in each category of economic stone (and why not other stones too), and when this is done the search criteria will be that at least one of them is present. This could be a fair bit more difficult to implement depending on how the search is implemented though, I wager.

[Pvt. Pirate]

haven't tried, but can you add "trees" and "other vegetation" with many different values aswell?

[PatrikLundell]

An alternative solution to the fuel thing would be the ability to select multiple items at once in each category of economic stone (and why not other stones too), and when this is done the search criteria will be that at least one of them is present. This could be a fair bit more difficult to implement depending on how the search is implemented though, I wager.

Instead of searching for a particular value, each geo biome element would have to be matched against a list, which should be about the same cost as matching another element (i.e. a list of two alternatives would cost about the same as two separate mandatory ones). The trickier part to implement that would probably be to change the list logic to allow for multiple selections while still being usable, somehow (as usual: it's typically the UI that causes the most trouble. For instance, the UI can't show what's selected, as there's room for only a single entry, so it might have to show something like "<Multiple alternatives selected>" instead.).

haven't tried, but can you add "trees" and "other vegetation" with many different values aswell?

I don't understand the question...
The various biomes you can search for imply various levels of starting trees (with exception of deserts, which can be completely treeless if the rainfall is low enough, and only have starting trees but won't get saplings if it's marginally higher). All biomes that aren't completely treeless or extremely low rainfall deserts get completely junglified given enough time [and no logging, of course] (which varies based on the biome).

If you mean "I want to have Feather Trees, Kobold Bulb, and Sliver Barb", that's doable (with very long lists of plants to select from), but I don't think it would be particularly useful: it would probably be better to look for the appropriate biomes/evilness and use the Biome Manipulator script to hack the ones that DF excluded from their biomes into the embark biomes instead.
I'm not sure how to implement it in a fashion that's not too costly either: possibly pre processing of biomes to list the ones containing the up to 3 selected plants: iterating over all the plants of a biome (as well as verifying the world tile is of an appropriate type is definitely too costly.

[Pvt. Pirate]

it's just that in the vanilla site finder you cannot select anything about trees at all.
so in certain worlds, i would look for a site with no trees and certain other properties in vein, but the sitefinder cannot help much with it yet.
in others i want a steep mountainside next to a dense jungle and look at 100 sites just to find that there is no place on the whole map, but a sitefinder with trees min/max would be a great help with that.

[PatrikLundell]

it's just that in the vanilla site finder you cannot select anything about trees at all.
so in certain worlds, i would look for a site with no trees and certain other properties in vein, but the sitefinder cannot help much with it yet.
in others i want a steep mountainside next to a dense jungle and look at 100 sites just to find that there is no place on the whole map, but a sitefinder with trees min/max would be a great help with that.

As I said, biomes imply their general tree densities and the plugin also provides region type as a search criterion. This means that mountain present (doesn't matter if you select biome or region type, as there's a 1:1 mapping for this one) + region type "jungle" present would find you every place where forest (of any kind, as that is what "jungle" actually maps to) is present together with mountain within an embark (while also matching the other criteria, of course).

Edit:
@Burneddi: Looking at the code, I find that it already supports searching for the reanimation option requested (and it's listed on the first page as well, which means it should be available [i.e. not awaiting a new DFHack release]): As far as I know, thralling and husking are the same thing.
N/A, Both, Any, Thralling, Reanimation, Not_Thralling, None

[Pvt. Pirate]

ah, then i must've forgot about that once i reached the end of the long list of awesome features sorry for having wasted your and my time.

[PatrikLundell]

DFHack 0.44.12-r2 has been released, which means a number of changes made to the Embark Assistant are available:
- Match indicators are now available on top of the "World" map.
- Changed the 'c'ancel logic to halt a search partway through if active and clear the results if not, allowing for partial results.
- Added Coal as a search criterion, as well as an added embark selection indication.

[Schmaven]

Just posting to say thank you for making a great embark finder!  I just now found a suitably difficult embark - not too hard, not too easy.  Well, 6 of the 7 dwarves are dead and it's only part way through the 2nd month, so it might be too hard, but that's what reclaiming is for 

I have iron, flux, evil clouds, high savagery, part evil, part neutral, cold weather, mountains, a stream and only a partial aquifer!

The search seemed to take about the same or less time than the vanilla search function too.

[Pvt. Pirate]

can you add search token for nonspecific searches?

"any fuel" to have at least one of the both coke producing lignite or bitumous coal
or just add new point "fuel" with options "N/A, absent, present, lignite, bitumous coal, both"

trees: none, little, moderate, woodland (i know i can set the search for certain biomes, but if i seriously don't care for the biome, but only for at least a few trees, that doesn't help)

keep up the great work on this neat plugin

[PatrikLundell]

- I don't understand what a non specific search is... String matching across unspecified categories doesn't really work without at least specifying which categories to search.

- "Coal" (as introduced two posts up) is any of the ores that produce coke. Is there any reason to specify which one (and I don't want to list them individually, as the code is intended to work even if you add new versions of such ores, so the code looks for the reaction to produce coke)? After all, if you're interested in bitcoal specifically you can search for that mineral.

- Trees: I'm not aware of the specific details that result in various amounts of trees at embark (all embarks that support saplings will reach the same junglified end state eventually in the absence of cutting, while the time it takes varies). I know that if the rainfall is extremely small there are no trees at all, and at a marginally higher level trees may be present at embark, but no saplings will appear (I don't remember the details, but it's something like 0-1: no trees, <5 no saplings, and the first category doesn't get shrubs either [but still supports farming of biome compatible crops]). Beyond that I have no info on what results in which initial tree density (well, ocean, lake, glacier, and mountain do not support trees at all). I can make (somewhat educated) guesses about which biomes ought to have which initial tree densities, but I don't know if there are any other factors that affects the outcome (although I suspect there are factors that could cause e.g. a savanna to be either sparse or moderate). DF obviously knows the differences as it's presented pre embark, but I don't know the formulae beyond what's mentioned.

[Pvt. Pirate]

i wasnt aware you added general "coke yes/no".
what i meant was that sometimes i want an embar without trees or at least don't care if there are trees and other times i just want trees, because i'll need them, while not caring if it's jungle, savannah, swamp or woodland hills.
so being able to sort and have trees or know that there won't be any would be useful, but i see how that is difficult to do when the game gives not enough info.
i even once had embarked in an area with trees:woodland and not even one tree was present.

[Pvt. Pirate]

after the "mousequery edge" bug on 44.12 is resolved, i tried it out, loved the way it is now, but the game is still too prone to crashing.
so, could you make a version with the new features, but for 0.44.09-r1 ?

[PatrikLundell]

No. The plugin is a part of DFHack, and so would require a new DFHack release for 0.44.09, which you'd have to convince those responsible for that to do, as I have no authority over that (and I think that would either require a significant monetary incentive or a physical threat: I can accept the former but won't condone the latter).
The reliance of being coded into DFHack releases is an important reason I avoid plugins whenever possible and make scripts instead (the other main reason is Git), but the performance hit from using a script is just too large in this case (estimated search time for a max size world is about ½ hour based on my script prototype [which isn't in a usable state]).

It would be possible for you to make your own copy of the desired DFHack version on Github/your computer, perform whatever adjustments are needed, compile it, and use the hacked DFHack version with your DF instance. Obviously, it requires that you know a bit about coding in C(++), the DFHack mapped structures, and are willing to fight Git.

Personally I've quit DF until the raid crash bug(s) have been fixed and the Villains are somewhat stable. My current estimate is that this would happen around September.

[Pvt. Pirate]

i totally understand you. i doubt they'll dive back into 44.09 though.
for now the 44.09 version works stable and your function does a great job already. thanks again for this great plugin