Another one?

[Flavius]

Firstly we need to discover Ludde's strategy. Is it a direct translation to C or did he add extendability along the way
Secondly play this thing and catalog the bugs and limits.
Quickly had a look at some files in Visual C, they are impressive and beautifully laid out.
Incidently you can look at C files in any editor i think.

[George]

Would the work on OpenTTD and TTDPatch be coordinated? Would it be possible to use TTDPatch graphics with OpenTTD?

[krtaylor]

Would the work on OpenTTD and TTDPatch be coordinated?

I doubt it, there's no real reason to. The Patch and OpenTTD are totally different.

Would it be possible to use TTDPatch graphics with OpenTTD?

Not currently, but I would imagine that would be one of the first extensions to OpenTTD. However, it's possible that OpenTTD would be designed to use a cleaner way of programming what the various sprites are for, rather than the somewhat cumbersome pseudosprites.

[TBOT]

This is big. I think at least the guys from TTU have to stop working on their project, and start working on this. I know plurarity(? - diversity - ) is good, but this is much better!

I don't know if you have any insight in the code, but the design is horrible. The way I see it only Ludde can work with it at the moment, and for someone else it's just a big mess.

TTU will continue, as you can read in my announcement in our section.

[CobraA1]

The way I see it only Ludde can work with it at the moment, and for someone else it's just a big mess.

I've taken a look, and I can understand at least half of it. As soon as I can get it to compile, I'm bound to take a look and possibly make changes. I've been suggesting adding a queue to the aircraft landing code TTDPatch for a while, but nobody really wanted to do it. Now I can do it myself - it took almost no time to find the point where the aircraft decide whether the runway is taken, and now it'll be trivial to implement my suggested changes now that everything's in C.

[orudge]

Precisely. If you take a good look at the code, it really isn't that hard to understand. It doesn't have the best structure, no, but that's why we should improve it (but not totally rewrite it using OO C++ or anything like that). Gradually, it'd also move away from Chris Sawyer's code to our own.

Attached are Ludde's latest changes to the code, by the way - I tried to attach these earlier, but something was playing up.

[Alltaken]

note the "ttd Patch" writer said 80% of the work, this is bad bad bad.

and the TTU writer said "the code is a mess"


some on guys its a comunity, i know that competition is here, but A the patch team doesn't need to feel like anything is a waste its been years of good fun and work, TTD was better than ever because of you.

and the TTU team i dunno whats happening with it, i havn't follwed it much sorry.

Alltaken

[CobraA1]

(but not totally rewrite it using OO C++ or anything like that)

Why not? We get modularity and flexibility if we write it in OO! I think we should.

[TBOT]

(but not totally rewrite it using OO C++ or anything like that)

Why not? We get modularity and flexibility if we write it in OO! I think we should.

== TTU

and the TTU writer said "the code is a mess"

I said that because as a developer I really think it's a mess. It's kinda like the style me and balloz had when we began with TTS. Since then our style increased tremendously.
The style of the openttd code can be much better, even in C, and I think that's the point to focus on right now for the openttd developers, not all the little extensions...

[CobraA1]

== TTU

So? TTU has a long ways to go, but here we have it already working.

[TBOT]

== TTU

So? TTU has a long ways to go, but here we have it already working.

But here it isn't OO (believe me, you can better start from scratch than try to convert it).