Problem sending ships to fishing grounds

[krtaylor]

That elitist attitude is unworthy of you. The more awkward it is to configure and use TTD, the fewer people will bother. The simpler it is, the more. And I want PTTD to reach the widest possible audience. TTDXC is not perfect - far from it - but it's a darn sight better than wading through ten million text parameters in Notepad.

[Rob]

That elitist attitude is unworthy of you. The more awkward it is to configure and use TTD, the fewer people will bother. The simpler it is, the more. And I want PTTD to reach the widest possible audience. TTDXC is not perfect - far from it - but it's a darn sight better than wading through ten million text parameters in Notepad.

It's not elite in my view.
TTDXC is far from perfect as you say, and it produces more questions than it solves in this state.
Notepad on the other hand works, and when you use the ttdpatch.cfg file created by the patch all the switches are explained quite well.
And if you read the changelog Patchman writes with every new versio, adding new switches is easy.

[Patchman]

And you cannot deny that, for the present discussion, TTDXC is not only useless but counterproductive, because it actively opposes people adding the required switch to ttdpatch.cfg.

If you have to go back to editing ttdpatch.cfg with Notepad every time we add a new option to an existing bit switch, you might as well learn to do that and not bother with "helpful" tools that do no more than confuse and obstruct you.

[DaleStan]

it's a darn sight better than wading through ten million text parameters in Notepad.

FVO "ten million" that equals one hundred eleven.

And don't forget that TTDXC thinks that TTDPatch 2.0.1 alpha 58 is more recent than TTDPatch 2.0.1 alpha 59 pre 3.

sfrankland, TTDXC is unaware that morebuildoptions has the enhancedbouys bit. If you want to use MB's fishery, you simply have no other choice than to use notepad to edit your config file.

[krtaylor]

And you cannot deny that, for the present discussion, TTDXC is not only useless but counterproductive, because it actively opposes people adding the required switch to ttdpatch.cfg.

Well, I'm not sure. I know an older version of TTDXC ate the parameters, but I added the parameter to mine and it didn't eat it. (That doesn't mean it works, I admit, but it's there, clearly visible).

I thought there was a mechanism for TTDXC to automatically update its miscmods descriptions via an XML file? Maybe that can work for morebuildoptions too?

And don't forget that TTDXC thinks that TTDPatch 2.0.1 alpha 58 is more recent than TTDPatch 2.0.1 alpha 59 pre 3.

It does seem to find the "pre" nomenclature confusing. Actually, I'm not a big fan of it either. Numbers are cheap; it couldn't have been a60, 61, and 62 instead of pre 1, 2, and 3? If they weren't full releases because they are test versions - well, really, they're all alphas, aren't they. Perhaps TTDXC could be extended to handle "pre" settings as well, maybe as a third option on the updater (in addition to "latest stable", which is pretty old, and "latest alpha", which has worked well for a long time.

[Patchman]

I thought there was a mechanism for TTDXC to automatically update its miscmods descriptions via an XML file? Maybe that can work for morebuildoptions too?

The patch writes this file correctly, with all entries for morebuildoptions. Either TTDXC doesn't read it correctly, or it doesn't read it at all, or is otherwise broken.

It does seem to find the "pre" nomenclature confusing. Actually, I'm not a big fan of it either.

"pre" version are not released to the general public. and are only meant to be tested by a few people so I can have more than myself testing a certain new feature. Anything wrong with pre versions will only affect a small audience, and I therefore don't care much about them. They allow me to find bugs in new features, and so I publish them as appropriate.

They should be considered one level below alpha. Unfortunately, there's no greek letter before "alpha", so I call them "pre-alpha".

[krtaylor]

Would it be feasible to use decimals? E.g. 59.1, 59.2. Depending on how TTDXC is coded, this might not confuse it.

[Patchman]

Each version has a code. That code always increases for newer versions, and I do believe TTDXC uses that code, except maybe it's a bit buggy.

For example, a58 is 020A0244. a59p3 is 020A0247 and a59 will be 020A024E.

[krtaylor]

Aha. First I've heard of this. Maybe Andrex doesn't know about it either. You can put it on your TTDXC buglist, DaleStan!

[Patchman]

I imagine it might be because a58 is the latest version at ttdpatch.net, and therefore TTDXC assumes that it must be the latest version.