Minetest logo

IRC log for #minetest-dev, 2017-06-12

| Channels | #minetest-dev index | Today | | Google Search | Plaintext

All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
00:22 sallyy1999 joined #minetest-dev
00:32 Bobr-m joined #minetest-dev
01:30 Bobr-m Hi
01:31 bigfoot547 Hi
01:42 Puka joined #minetest-dev
01:50 CalebDavis joined #minetest-dev
03:48 Grandolf joined #minetest-dev
04:38 _stephen_ joined #minetest-dev
04:39 _stephen_ Looks like the latest minetest or maybe minetest_game is broken.
04:39 _stephen_ I did a checkout from git and I can't build.
04:39 _stephen_ If I checkout an older version I can get it to compile, but the current master will not.
04:39 _stephen_ http://paste.debian.net/971087/
04:39 _stephen_ http://paste.debian.net/971088/
04:43 Hijiri what tool does the travis build use to lint PRs?
04:48 Hijiri _stephen_: did you try updating jsoncpp
04:48 _stephen_ haven't yet.  I can see how that could caus eit.
04:49 _stephen_ What version should I be using?
04:49 Hijiri I don't know, just try the newest stable version
04:49 Hijiri or whatever you can get easilyy
04:53 _stephen_ Oh, looks like I need 1.8.0 according to 2362d3f926e2702585f60011d4cea90b4faf4bd6
04:58 Bobr-m Hmm
05:00 _stephen_ damnit, newest the repo has is 1.7
05:00 _stephen_ Guess I'll see if that works.
05:01 nerzhul joined #minetest-dev
05:15 _stephen_ What distribution of Linux do you generally build on?
05:16 Hijiri Debian
05:16 Hijiri Debian Testing
05:17 Hunterz joined #minetest-dev
05:17 _stephen_ and looks like 1.7 wont do.
05:17 _stephen_ I'm just going to have to build an older version for a while.
05:21 _stephen_ I can build the version from just before that checkin, so I'll just use that until my distro catches up.
05:22 _stephen_ Thanks for the help.
05:48 srifqi joined #minetest-dev
05:49 srifqi Trying to compile Minetest using buildbot.sh in Ubuntu on Windows. Wish me luck.
05:49 srifqi (Targeting: win32)
05:54 srifqi No more mutex and thread compilation error! :D
05:55 srifqi But I get a lot of strtok warning.
05:55 nerzhul srifqi, there is compilation problem, the build is industrialized, just follow either travis-ci build or gitlab-ci
05:55 nerzhul but it's not really a discussion for -dev, maybe for -hub
06:19 srifqi joined #minetest-dev
06:26 Fritigern joined #minetest-dev
07:34 kilbith joined #minetest-dev
07:39 Fritigern joined #minetest-dev
08:01 nerzhul joined #minetest-dev
08:28 est31 left #minetest-dev
08:48 Fritigern joined #minetest-dev
09:07 est31 joined #minetest-dev
09:08 est31 joined #minetest-dev
09:17 DS-minetest joined #minetest-dev
09:19 est31 left #minetest-dev
09:27 nerzhul sfan5, why there should be discontinuity ?
09:44 sfan5 pch and mt return different random values even for the same seed because they are not the same
09:44 sfan5 the point of the seed in world generations is that it returns the same values
09:47 cx384 joined #minetest-dev
09:57 Fritigern joined #minetest-dev
10:00 jcalve joined #minetest-dev
10:33 Darcidride joined #minetest-dev
10:57 YuGiOhJCJ joined #minetest-dev
11:06 Fritigern joined #minetest-dev
11:40 Raven262 joined #minetest-dev
11:48 CalebDavis joined #minetest-dev
11:58 Fixer joined #minetest-dev
12:10 Fritigern joined #minetest-dev
12:16 Fritigern joined #minetest-dev
12:20 RobbieF joined #minetest-dev
12:33 Taoki joined #minetest-dev
13:02 RobbieF joined #minetest-dev
13:04 RobbieF joined #minetest-dev
13:16 antims joined #minetest-dev
13:34 Megaf joined #minetest-dev
13:38 DS-minetest joined #minetest-dev
13:42 octacian joined #minetest-dev
13:52 Megaf_ joined #minetest-dev
13:57 DI3HARD139 joined #minetest-dev
14:14 halt_ joined #minetest-dev
14:16 est31 joined #minetest-dev
14:17 QwertyDragon joined #minetest-dev
14:30 CalebDavis joined #minetest-dev
14:35 cx384 joined #minetest-dev
14:53 DI3HARD139 joined #minetest-dev
15:26 halt_ joined #minetest-dev
15:27 halt_ joined #minetest-dev
15:29 halt_ joined #minetest-dev
15:45 DI3HARD139 joined #minetest-dev
15:53 kilbith_ joined #minetest-dev
16:14 Player_2 joined #minetest-dev
16:48 Krock joined #minetest-dev
17:00 Hunterz joined #minetest-dev
17:12 DS-minetest joined #minetest-dev
17:12 DI3HARD139 joined #minetest-dev
17:25 RobbieF Hi Shara
17:32 YuGiOhJCJ joined #minetest-dev
17:39 srifqi joined #minetest-dev
17:40 TC02 joined #minetest-dev
17:43 Megaf joined #minetest-dev
17:45 CalebDavis joined #minetest-dev
17:51 nerzhul joined #minetest-dev
18:13 Tmanyo joined #minetest-dev
18:22 nerzhul_ joined #minetest-dev
19:41 red-001 ShadowNinja, is #5965 a good way to go about implementing #5958 or would it be better to create a new security system from scratch?
19:41 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/5965 -- Load client-side mods into memory before executing them. by red-001
19:41 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/5958 -- Proper CSM security module
20:23 paramat joined #minetest-dev
20:26 paramat shall we tag latest MTgame as 0.4.16.1 because game#1761 is fixed and only trivial PRs have been merged since release? and before any other potentially risky PRs are merged?
20:26 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest​/minetest_game/issues/1761 -- Regression - overriding of default functions does not work anymore (lavacooling)
20:28 Fixer add tin blocks stairs/slabs...
20:28 Fixer cat_please.jpg
20:34 kilbith joined #minetest-dev
20:57 CalebDavis joined #minetest-dev
20:59 est31 left #minetest-dev
21:06 Lunatrius joined #minetest-dev
21:12 RobbieF left #minetest-dev
21:26 paramat #5972 tested and ready
21:26 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/5972 -- Mgv6 mudflow: Avoid floating stacked decorations by paramat
21:28 nerzhul wow indent is purely crazy, too long lines, please do functions
21:28 nerzhul what a unmaintainable function omg
21:29 nerzhul 9 levels of indentations
21:38 paramat yes mgv6 code is pretty bad, there are many other things to clean up, but, another PR
21:48 nerzhul paramat, you already said another PR but you should fix the code style with your pr, like everybody does.
21:48 nerzhul i'm waiting your 2-3 months old PR for a unittest about the range check you fixes twice whereas a unittest can handle the border cases.
21:54 kilbith you're expecting paramat to write a unittest?
21:54 kilbith lol
21:55 paramat the cleanup of mgv6 required is so big it makes sense to correct this in a separate PR. this is not code style but major code restruscturing
21:55 nerzhul kilbith, i except paramt will stop to open duplicate issues and will conform to our coding rules and fix his PR before merge, else i will finish by closing them or reverting until he codes correctly
21:56 nerzhul no separate PR, move some indented code part to a function.
21:56 paramat sorry i don't want to write a unittest for mapgen limit
21:56 nerzhul lol paramat you are just stupid man, you fixed it twice in master because you didn't code the unittest which cover edge case and this will show you EXACTLY the problem before merge on a so sensible function.
21:56 nerzhul also i take 5 mins to do it
21:57 nerzhul and i don't want to merge your PR on unreadable unmaintainable function with 9 indent levels, 140 lines and with lines over 90 chars which is our limit.
21:57 paramat nerzhul my PR is fine for merging, i already intend to clean up mgv6 in a separate PR. restructuring mgv6 code to avoid this amount of indentation is a big job that will mean rewriting the whole function, this is best doen separately
21:58 nerzhul no it's not fine for merging.
21:58 nerzhul restructure it
21:58 nerzhul fix the code style.
21:58 nerzhul you never do separate maintenance pr, it's just ... smoke
21:58 paramat so you can write the unittest, dev work is voluntary
21:58 nerzhul no.
21:58 nerzhul you do
21:59 nerzhul it's your PR
21:59 nerzhul not mine
21:59 kilbith he can't write one
21:59 nerzhul why kilbith , tell me ?
22:01 paramat i have done lots of maintenance PRs, look at my history
22:01 nerzhul then do it with this PR
22:02 paramat a unittest does not have to be written by the coder of the relevant code
22:02 nerzhul lol
22:02 nerzhul i will not fix your shit man
22:02 nerzhul i don't write often unit tests, but when i ask it there is a good reason
22:02 paramat ok i'll look into moving the specific code block to a new function
22:04 nerzhul ty
22:04 nerzhul this function is over complicated, reading is important for everybody who doesn't know very well the code
22:04 paramat the code block i alter has corect code style, it just happens to be in a larger function with indentation issues, therefore a fix requires a big rewrite that is possibly best done later, i admit this is a borderline case
22:05 nerzhul not the line length
22:06 srifqi joined #minetest-dev
22:06 paramat ok someone else can write the unittest, you don't have to, but i don't have to either. "i will not fix your shit man" lack of a unittest is not a breakage, there's nothing to fix
22:07 paramat stop being an ass
22:07 nerzhul for this PR there is no unittest for me
22:08 nerzhul i talk about the unittest for the static function who checks the map borders
22:08 Lunatrius joined #minetest-dev
22:08 nerzhul a unittest permits to ensure in some useful case you correctly handle the limits of your function and if you change it you just need to launch the unit test to ensure all matchs like it does, less tests to do
22:10 paramat yes we are talking about the unittest for the mapgen limit, i know
22:15 paramat erm, no lines are over 82 columns
22:16 paramat tab size 4 remember
22:19 paramat please don't make threats of unilateral action, it takes several disapprovals to close a PR or to revert
22:19 nerzhul jsut make this function maintainable
22:20 jin_xi joined #minetest-dev
22:21 rubenwardy which PR is this?
22:21 rubenwardy #5972
22:21 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/5972 -- Mgv6 mudflow: Avoid floating stacked decorations by paramat
22:21 rubenwardy that's fine imo
22:22 nerzhul 9 levels of indents are fine to you ?
22:22 rubenwardy like, it seems to be a fix to a section of the code, and only touches one part
22:22 rubenwardy no, but it should be done in a refactor - before or after this PR
22:22 paramat the question is, if a code block i work on is inside a large amount of indentations, do i have to rewrite the whole function to reduce the indents? i'm not sure
22:22 nerzhul + breaks + do while + for + for + for + for + if + while + for
22:22 nerzhul just lol
22:23 nerzhul my suggestion for this pr
22:23 nerzhul move code inside "if (!dropped_to_unknown) {" to a function
22:23 rubenwardy that's also fair
22:24 nerzhul this will remove 2 indents level from the function
22:24 paramat this doesn't make the commit itself unmergeable, because including the cleanup would confuse the review of the fix, however does it need to be another commit within this PR? i think a separate PR would be ok
22:25 nerzhul will you really do it or this is just like all other case a pure smoke ?
22:26 srifqi Can we just have two commits in one PR? First for logic changes and second for code style fix.
22:26 paramat yes a split there seems good, i'll consider it
22:26 nerzhul srifqi, sounds reasonable
22:27 rubenwardy in this case, the splitting won't make it less reviewable
22:27 rubenwardy as that changes are all in one 20 line section
22:27 nerzhul yes paramat do 2 commits in same pr
22:27 rubenwardy in other cases, it would
22:27 nerzhul reviewable in both cases
22:27 rubenwardy but 2 commits is good
22:27 nerzhul and less time lost to review a code style :)
22:27 paramat "just like all other case a pure smoke ?" like one case when i made it clear i probably will not want to write a unittest
22:28 nerzhul and if you did it, you won't fixed master 2 times because calculation was false
22:28 nerzhul because all cases are directly covered by CI and unittests, it's very useful in border cases on complex maths calculs don't forget it
22:28 paramat i doubt it, the issues and bugs were quite subtle
22:28 nerzhul there is no subtile in IT, there is only bugs
22:29 paramat you don't understand the issues at world edge, i know them better than anyone
22:29 nerzhul then you are the best to write the border test case
22:29 nerzhul it permit to change the funciton and ensure it works as intended next time :)
22:30 paramat i am best qualified yeah :]
22:30 nerzhul then next time i see a unittest case, please just do it, it you die or disapear it permits to ensure code quality for less knowledged people
22:31 TC02 joined #minetest-dev
22:31 Karazhan joined #minetest-dev
22:32 paramat anyway, it seems i am not forced to cleanup in this PR, another dev has a different opinion, but i will still consider it as a separate commit in this PR
22:32 nerzhul it's nice to collaborate, as i take many time to answer on CSM
22:34 rubenwardy more unit tests would be good
22:34 rubenwardy but Minetest isn't really designed in that way, in most places
22:34 paramat you can probably tell i don't like writing unittests ;]
22:34 rubenwardy no one does :)
22:35 nerzhul oh unittests are difficult on games
22:35 nerzhul if you want unittests on environment class it's difficult
22:36 nerzhul also i don't really like our unittest custom framework, it has some cons, i prefer the long time and robust CPPUnit library which works with macros and has some interesting features
22:39 paramat ok, i'll add a commit for cleanup to my PR
22:40 nerzhul ty
22:43 halt_ joined #minetest-dev
22:44 halt_ joined #minetest-dev
23:07 paramat left #minetest-dev
23:43 bigfoot547 joined #minetest-dev
23:56 bigfoot547 joined #minetest-dev

| Channels | #minetest-dev index | Today | | Google Search | Plaintext