Time  Nick         Message
04:25 RealBadAngel hmmmm, here?
04:26 hmmmm        ?
04:26 RealBadAngel hi
04:27 RealBadAngel i just thought we need get_pointed_thing
04:28 RealBadAngel it can be get, but only in callbacks
04:28 RealBadAngel theres no straight way to get it
04:28 hmmmm        huh
04:28 hmmmm        what do you mean, why
04:29 RealBadAngel a) its being requested since quite a while b) its useful for modders
04:30 hmmmm        but why do you need to do it in a callback
04:30 RealBadAngel i said it can be obtained *now* only in nodes callbacks
04:31 hmmmm        the pointed thing is such a client-side concept
04:31 hmmmm        by the time it gets to the server it probably already changed
04:33 RealBadAngel propably yes, but if you want to mod a tool
04:33 RealBadAngel its needed anyway
04:33 hmmmm        this is so fubar
04:34 hmmmm        the actual solution is to add client-side modding support
04:34 hmmmm        firing a gun or something should be the client-side mod part, reporting the hit to the server-side modding part and tracking damage is the server side mod's job
04:35 RealBadAngel imho delay is not a problem, its kinda click and reaction stuff (you get pointed thing on time tool being used)
04:35 hmmmm        ugh whatever fine addi t
04:35 hmmmm        i don't care
04:35 hmmmm        keep adding broken shit to support a broken model and then accept the shittiness as par for the course when so much better is possible
04:36 RealBadAngel i havent even start coding it, cmon
04:36 RealBadAngel i was just asking bout it
04:37 RealBadAngel why are you so angry?
04:37 hmmmm        because it seems like everything is a patch job
04:41 RealBadAngel pointed_thing yes, its a patch
04:42 RealBadAngel but about what im doing at all, you cannot call that job "patching"
04:45 RealBadAngel dare to call that a patch: http://digitalaudioconcepts.com/vanessa/hobbies/minetest/screenshots/slopes-test.png
04:45 hmmmm        yes, every once in a while something good gets committed
04:45 hmmmm        i will admit
05:21 RealBadAngel but i agree we need client side modding
05:22 RealBadAngel inventory, hud etc mods need it badly
05:22 RealBadAngel also that will mean freeing up server resources
05:23 RealBadAngel not to mention smoother gameplay
05:24 RealBadAngel server shouldnt give a single fuck what inventory mod is being used on client side
08:46 sol_invictus updated #1781
08:46 ShadowBot    https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/1781 -- Add lastlogin to auth file by donat-b
08:46 sol_invictus comments?
09:47 sol_invictus sfan5?
09:47 sfan5        hm?
09:49 sol_invictus can you review 1781?
09:49 sol_invictus unknown time is set to zero now
09:49 sfan5        sure
09:49 sol_invictus also I fixed a bug in chat command that I didn't notice first time
09:52 sol_invictus I guess auth.txt is not documented anywhere?
09:53 sfan5        not that I'm aware
09:53 sfan5        probably not
09:53 sol_invictus okay then
09:54 sfan5        sol_invictus: see github comments
09:55 * sfan5      away
10:02 sol_invictus sfan5: replied/updated
10:02 sfan5        I'll look at that later
10:02 sfan5        I have to go now
10:05 sol_invictus k
11:28 kilbith      Zeno` : the build today works perfectly, it seems that the previous doesn't included your fix (dd4c21c)
11:29 kilbith      *6c9bbb0, sorry
11:41 Zeno`        yeah
11:41 Zeno`        I think it missed the auto build by >< much
11:43 Zeno`        I've also updated my clean up of the_game() to include all the latest commits
11:43 Zeno`        works great :)
12:56 RealBadAngel anybody wanna make mumble plugin?
12:57 RealBadAngel lol
12:57 RealBadAngel who else dont want?
12:57 Zeno`        I will attempt it when my refactor of the_game() is merged
12:59 RealBadAngel i was laughin at proller and nore's quit, right after my question
12:59 RealBadAngel Zeno`, i asked you already, whats the state of the pull
13:00 RealBadAngel do you think its finished?
13:00 Zeno`        it's finished
13:00 Zeno`        tested for 2 weeks now
13:00 RealBadAngel any issues?
13:02 RealBadAngel have any other dev reviewed it already?
13:04 Zeno`        I have found no issues. I would like other devs to review it though
13:04 Zeno`        hmmmm looked at the src code but I don't know if he tested
13:04 RealBadAngel i can test it, no problemo
13:05 Zeno`        that'd be great. I haven't rebased with head (not on git anyway, but I have locally) but I'm sure you can do that ;)
13:06 RealBadAngel it could be easier if you do the rebase
13:06 RealBadAngel you know the code
13:06 Zeno`        ok one sec
13:06 RealBadAngel and i can hold mainstream merges for the time its being tested
13:08 Zeno`        ok pushed
13:09 Zeno`        the only potential conflict was with guiFormSpecMenu but git diff refactor_the_game master src/guiFormSpecMenu.cpp   and   git diff refactor_the_game master src/guiFormSpecMenu.h   show no diffs
13:12 Zeno`        https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pull/1756
13:19 RealBadAngel jeeeeeez
13:19 RealBadAngel 31 commits?? squash it for christ sake
13:22 Zeno`        I will, I will :)
13:22 Zeno`        when it's given a thumbs up I will squash ;)
13:25 RealBadAngel +1
13:25 RealBadAngel go for it
13:29 Zeno`        I can't merge :p
13:29 RealBadAngel merge? i asked for squashed PR
13:30 Zeno`        oh
13:30 Zeno`        umm... I'll make a backup
13:35 RealBadAngel git rebase -i HEAD~31
13:36 RealBadAngel git push -f
13:36 RealBadAngel that will do
13:36 RealBadAngel just follow on screen instructions
13:38 Zeno`        yeah I wanted to keep a backup for myself
13:38 Zeno`        squished... waiting for build
13:44 PenguinDad   Zeno`: the builds passed!
13:44 Zeno`        yay!
13:45 Zeno`        I would have been surprised if they didn't :)
14:51 sol_invictus sfan5 can you take a look again?
14:52 sfan5        sure
15:04 iqualfragile sfan5: when will the refractor pr be merged?
15:06 sfan5        why are you asking me
15:08 iqualfragile because you are online
15:13 jin_xi       just ask into the void
16:43 sol_invictus sfan5: who else can approve the pull?
16:44 sfan5        sol_invictus: https://github.com/orgs/minetest/people
16:44 sol_invictus so, anyone of the devs
17:30 paramat      nore, sfan5, my pull request for fixing/improving boats mod has been rebased and the commits squashed, please could this be tested and/or merged? i made the change requested by Blockmen, haven't seen him on IRC for a while though https://github.com/minetest/minetest_game/pull/328
19:02 Krock        #1785
19:02 ShadowBot    https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/1785 -- Many functional unimportant code style fixes by SmallJoker
19:05 proller      no no no
19:06 PenguinDad   yes yes yes
19:08 Amaz         yes yes yes yes
19:08 VanessaE     not until refactor_the_game is finished and merged.
19:08 VanessaE     imho
19:08 Krock        ^can deal with it.
19:09 Krock        they only _could_ conflict in main.cpp
19:10 Krock        game.cpp is not on the code style fix list
19:11 proller      do not fix style manually
19:11 proller      use tools and provide full commands
19:11 Krock        suggest an other way
19:11 Krock        well, somewhen it should happen
19:12 VanessaE     well
19:12 VanessaE     for once I agree with proller
19:13 VanessaE     this is probably the job of some kind of automated tool
19:13 Krock        VanessaE, but what happens when it's done? just let it ont he left side and ever fix the coding style?
19:13 proller      also last time c55 wants to kill any who make it
19:13 Krock        *On the
19:14 VanessaE     but that doesn't necessarily mean there's a tool out there that'll clean up the code to fit minetest's defined coding style
19:14 proller      and this pull broke all other pulls
19:15 kaeza        code style cleanup is fine as part of a related pull request ("fixed foo and fixed style while at it")
19:15 kaeza        purely cosmetic fixes are bad IMHO
19:15 VanessaE     kaeza: indeed, I do that from time to time in my code also
19:15 VanessaE     so long as I'm working on the same file, I'll fiddle with the style of the surrounding code if I can be bothered :P
19:16 Krock        so, a complete change of the codes would be required to have a proper styling?
19:16 VanessaE     Krock: well, isn't there a merge switch that basically ignores whitespace?
19:18 Krock        VanessaE, sorry, what do you mean by that?
19:19 VanessaE     Krock: when merging a pull into some bit of code that's had everything moved around for the sake of style cleanup, which is usually a matter of inserting and removing a lot of spaces/tabs/newlines, I seem to remember there being an option one can enable to have git ignore those spacing changes and only concentrate on the actual code
19:21 VanessaE     in other words, are proller's (and my) concerns even warranted?
19:22 proller      ignore spaces on merge is bad, after it you have very different code
19:22 VanessaE     do you?
19:22 Krock        After some googling, I found "git merge -Xignore-all-space", looks good. Also, I think the devs listen to the other people
19:23 VanessaE     when last I knew, spaces among the code meant nothing; only spaces inside quotes had any meaning.
19:23 VanessaE     (unless you're trying to shoehorn a space into the middle of a function name or some such)
19:24 VanessaE     and even if the code comes out different, who says you can't turn around, style-correct it and test the result?
19:24 VanessaE     and if you're merging without testing, you don't deserve to have commit access *at all*
19:25 VanessaE     (at least if you do so repeatedly)
19:26 Krock        I could test the stuff but only changing the coding style shouldn't be a problem at all
19:26 VanessaE     right.  I'm talking about committing to upstream though.
19:26 Krock        If it's required to merge this, I could build it. "All is well — The Travis CI build passed"
19:27 Krock        ah
19:27 kilbith      Krock : unless you accidentally deleted a caracter that it should not...
19:27 Krock        kilbith, It did not delete any character which did not match the replace term
19:28 Krock        I'd be crazy when doing that manually
19:28 kilbith      that's fine then
20:17 ShadowNinja  hmmmm: https://github.com/minetest/minetest/commit/1cb6ea6346f568cd068380c5af52f7be269e3490#diff-5c9fad38a1e2b7a0227fd3f5282dcc09R480 No, this isn't correct.  The second argument is the number of elements to pop.  Passing -1 probably adds a nil value to the stack.  The correct function to remove values at arbritrary stack indexes is lua_remove.
20:17 hmmmm        OH
20:17 hmmmm        I thought zeno was talking about how I don't pop before returning on failure
20:18 hmmmm        that piece of code was copy pasted from the original replacements implementation... so whoever wrote that...
20:18 hmmmm        in fact, that bug's been in there a while
20:18 ShadowNinja  hmmmm: He might have been talking about that, but I noticed this.
20:19 hmmmm        if you're returning no values, you don't really need to clean the stack
20:20 ShadowNinja  hmmmm: Probably should though, I don't expect any functions to add or remove stack elements unless that's their purpose.
20:21 ShadowNinja  It's O.K. after functions directly called from the Lua API because Lua resets the stack for you, but it's considered bad style.