I don't consider that much useful.
/me wonders how much of NFORenum he doesn't consider useful.
A quick glance through the readme and the -h message finds: @@PRESERVEMESSAGES, most of @@BEAUTIFY (especially the configurability), @@LET and its associated RPN expression evaluator, @@USEOLDSPRITENUMS, --comment, --data, and --no-replace.
Any idea why they're in there, since I don't consider them useful? Because someone else thought they would be useful, and asked that I implement them.
And on a different subject:
I went to test TTDXC 2.8.6 -- I put it in my TTD folder, and ran it, and it quite helpfully said "Unable to create switches.xml info file. TTDXC will download the info file for TTDPatch 2.0 rev 1 now."
I'm not quite sure what it's smoking there, because it didn't even *try* to start ttdpatchw.exe (I know this because my firewall allerts me when unknown programs try to start other programs.) Had it done so, TTDPatch would have done as TTDXC requested, and generated a proper XML file. (This was verified by running ttdpatchw -!S- from a command line.)
If I manually generate switches.xml, TTDXC deletes it and then reports that switches.xml couldn't be generated, as above.
The ttdpatchw.exe in my folder, as reported by -!T-, is "TTDPatch V2.6 alpha 0 r1141mod (Windows)".
The same basic problem is exhibited with my local 2.5 build. (version "TTDPatch V2.5 beta 8 r1135mod (Windows)")
EDIT: Fix there/they're, and a copy&paste error in the 2.5 version number.
To get a good answer, ask a Smart Question
. Similarly, if you want a bug fixed, write a Useful Bug Report
. No TTDPatch crashlog? Then follow directions
) | PlaneSet
) | grfcodec
) | grfdebug.log parser