Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Poll

After experimenting with the options, how is 40d13? Problems only count if the defaults don't work.

Faster than 40d, no problems
- 42 (26.1%)
Faster than 40d, problems
- 72 (44.7%)
No slower than 40d, no problems
- 14 (8.7%)
No slower than 40d, problems
- 16 (9.9%)
Slower than 40d, no problems
- 2 (1.2%)
Slower than 40d, problems
- 3 (1.9%)
Doesn't work (please explain)
- 12 (7.5%)

Total Members Voted: 160


Pages: 1 ... 74 75 [76] 77 78 ... 147

Author Topic: FotF: Help test the output code for the next version of DF (40d13)  (Read 373697 times)

Mercanthyr

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF (40d11)
« Reply #1125 on: March 25, 2009, 06:40:52 am »
interesting, I don't believe I've encountered it until this latest fortress I've been playing.
Logged

G-Flex

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF (40d10)
« Reply #1126 on: March 25, 2009, 07:54:10 am »
Quote from: Baughn on March 25, 2009, 02:34:25 am
Quote from: G-Flex on March 25, 2009, 12:46:24 am
Hey Baughn,

I posted a loooong time ago about this, in this thread, probably about version 40d6 or somewhere around there. It was before you fixed whatever that irritating problem was that was eating everybody's GFPS for breakfast (I forget what it was).

So now I tried 40d10, got confused by the new formatting of the partial print parameters, and tried a bunch of combinations.

None of them worked! D:

On the old version, I recall a partial print:0 working fine with the single buffer. Now that doesn't seem to work, and no other combinations seem to work either (except Standard, obviously). Whenever I try to use non-Standard print methods, I get flicker like crazy, even if I set the partial print number really high while using that.

Anything I should know about?

In the new version, there's been some work to avoid it being possible to set option combinations that make no sense.

The options that worked for you before should now be as follows (tell me if this doesn't work):
[PRINT_MODE:PARTIAL:0]
[SINGLE_BUFFER:YES]

Yeah, that's what I tried. I'll do some further testing later to make sure that the similar options DID work in the old version, but I'm basically positive that they did, concerning I remember it and noted down what FPS I got, and so forth. I'll check again later anyway. But yeah, PARTIAL:0 and SINGLE_BUFFER:YES causes crazy flickering.
Logged
There are 2 types of people in the world: Those who understand hexadecimal, and those who don't.
Visit the #Bay12Games IRC channel on NewNet
== Human Renovation: My Deus Ex mod/fan patch (v1.30, updated 5/31/2012) ==

PMantix

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF (40
« Reply #1127 on: March 25, 2009, 08:17:45 am »
I'm still getting key doubling when I'm building in d11..   specifically, I tell it to build, say, a bed, but instead of it asking me what bed to build, it just selects the first bed on the list..  essentially skipping that selection because 'enter' is being hit twice once I tell it where to build a bed

Does the same when I'm building walls and floors..   probably others too, but these were the only ones I noticed. I caught on when I tried to build a wall that was 3x1 but it only asked me to select 2 building materials..  because it had already built 1 using the first available building material on the list.
Logged

spathi4tw

  • Escaped Lunatic
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF (40
« Reply #1128 on: March 25, 2009, 09:05:08 am »
Quote
spathi4tw: Thank you for the detailed report!  If I understand it right you have a keyboard that is labeled as qwerty and have set the layout as Dvorak using something in the Mac OS.  Can you check the physical -, =, z, x, and c keys as well.  So far I think there is a problem at the OS level for you, but until 2 physical keys map to the same value I am not calling it conclusive.

Yes, my keyboard is a regular old u.s. qwerty keyboard and I use the standard Mac OS X International Keyboard Layouts settings to switch the layouts, so the translation is being done at the OS software level. I think DF is mixing its methods of how it's obtaining keycodes, getting some before OS translation and some after but that's just a guess. It also seems to all be consistent at least on d10 and d11 even though it's getting the pre-translation codes. So maybe it's just a matter now of getting it to consistently do the right thing instead of the wrong thing!  ;)

The first column of my table (in my previous post) is the physical key. The subsequent columns are what appeared on the screen in various versions of DF while the OS was set to Dvorak. So I tested '-', and '=', but of course somehow left off 'z'... The 'x' and 'c' tests fell under the 'letters work as expected' heading. All of these are included below.

Under DF 40d: (Physical Qwerty keyboard key press vs resulting output when using OS X Dvorak Layout)
PhysicalExpectedDF 40dDF 40d9
-[--
=]==
z;Nothingz
xqq (correct)q (correct)
cjj (correct)j (correct)

It's worth pointing out that the 'z' result means that in DF 40d9 using a Dvorak layout (on a Mac) there are two keys that produce a 'z' output (the physical 'z' key and the physical '/' key).
Logged

Grax

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Only.
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF (40d11)
« Reply #1129 on: March 25, 2009, 11:15:41 am »
As it seems 2me "The d11" ;-) is much faster than d9.

Want to complain on two very annoing things about mining:
1. Miners dig around theirselves and stuck in space.
2. Digging large rooms shows some oddity in mining algorithms - maybe wrong order in the inner structure of mining-job stacking? - miners digs not straight and consecutive ways but in strange manner walking about to dig almost nearest places from different ways, so the work takes twice the time needed for that.
Logged
Finis sanctificat media.

Footkerchief

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Juffo-Wup is strong in this place.
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF (40d11)
« Reply #1130 on: March 25, 2009, 11:20:14 am »
Quote from: Grax on March 25, 2009, 11:15:41 am
As it seems 2me "The d11" ;-) is much faster than d9.

Want to complain on two very annoing things about mining:
1. Miners dig around theirselves and stuck in space.
2. Digging large rooms shows some oddity in mining algorithms - maybe wrong order in the inner structure of mining-job stacking? - miners digs not straight and consecutive ways but in strange manner walking about to dig almost nearest places from different ways, so the work takes twice the time needed for that.

Yes, these problems have been widely noted and are slated to be fixed at some point in the future.
Logged

Neonivek

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF (40d11)
« Reply #1131 on: March 25, 2009, 11:21:48 am »
Quote
Miners dig around theirselves and stuck in space

Why does this stick out to me so much?

and why do I think this would make an excellent children's series?
Logged

AbuDhabi

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF (40d11)
« Reply #1132 on: March 25, 2009, 11:35:06 am »
Still having layout difficulties. 40d11 reacts to my keyboard like it was a QWERTY layout.
Logged

chaoticag

  • Bay Watcher
  • All Natural Pengbean
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF (40d11)
« Reply #1133 on: March 25, 2009, 11:51:06 am »
Isn't it a qwerty keyboard? I haven't seen any other type of keyboard in Abu Dhabi. Of course, if it turns out your user name is just to mess with me then congratulations.

Actually, post your keyboard layout, and I'll see what I can do.

Never mind, even if I do change all key bindings the game just asks you to make nonsensical comands. See if you could get yourself an old qwerty keyboard instead.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2009, 12:21:27 pm by chaoticag »
Logged

bombcar

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF (40d11)
« Reply #1134 on: March 25, 2009, 12:13:55 pm »
Would it be possible to add a "keyboard debug" to BC or something? Basically, you start it, press keys, and it tells you what it saw.

Then the person can compare with what they thought they were going to get. Maybe even show scancodes, etc.
Logged

Belal

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF (40d11)
« Reply #1135 on: March 25, 2009, 12:30:11 pm »
Just wanted to say that d11 is treating my dvorak layout as if it were qwerty.  OS is windows xp.  Running d9 it correctly translates my keys to their dvorak vaules, d11 transmits qwerty layout regardless of settings.
Logged

chaoticag

  • Bay Watcher
  • All Natural Pengbean
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF (40d11)
« Reply #1136 on: March 25, 2009, 12:31:31 pm »
Actually, I found the problem. The problem is that the game uses key locations defined on the game to know which key is which. I'm working on it right now, but this could take a long, confusing while.
Try replacing your initerface with this (Data>init>interface)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
« Last Edit: March 25, 2009, 12:55:12 pm by chaoticag »
Logged

Grax

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Only.
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF (40d11)
« Reply #1137 on: March 25, 2009, 02:14:58 pm »
Quote from: Footkerchief on March 25, 2009, 11:20:14 am
Yes, these problems have been widely noted and are slated to be fixed at some point in the future.
I knew it, i knew it, that i'm not the only one with crazy miners. ;-)
Logged
Finis sanctificat media.

Jurph

  • Bay Watcher
  • Minister of Belt-fed Weaponry
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF (40
« Reply #1138 on: March 25, 2009, 03:07:33 pm »
Is this thread the right place to ask for 40d11 checksums and/or memory locations for interface with third-party apps?  I know that these incremental versions are mostly meant for stability testing, but it would be nice if there were a way to run the latest version with (e.g.) Dwarf Manager; DM's functionality makes high-pop forts playable and could help uncover bugs that a cursory first-year playtest might not.

If I'm in the wrong thread just let me know.
Logged
Dreambrother has my original hammer-shaped Great Hall.  Towerweak has taken the idea to the next level.

AbuDhabi

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF (40d11)
« Reply #1139 on: March 25, 2009, 03:53:20 pm »
Quote from: chaoticag on March 25, 2009, 11:51:06 am
Isn't it a qwerty keyboard? I haven't seen any other type of keyboard in Abu Dhabi. Of course, if it turns out your user name is just to mess with me then congratulations.

Actually, post your keyboard layout, and I'll see what I can do.

Never mind, even if I do change all key bindings the game just asks you to make nonsensical comands. See if you could get yourself an old qwerty keyboard instead.

My username's background is something else than my home country. I'm from Poland. My OS is WinXPSP2. My keyboard layout is Dvorak. Essentially, I have the exact same problem as:
Quote from: Belal on March 25, 2009, 12:30:11 pm
Just wanted to say that d11 is treating my dvorak layout as if it were qwerty.  OS is windows xp.  Running d9 it correctly translates my keys to their dvorak vaules, d11 transmits qwerty layout regardless of settings.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 74 75 [76] 77 78 ... 147
« previous next »