| Time |
Nick |
Message |
| 00:14 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 00:39 |
|
damiel joined #minetest-dev |
| 01:01 |
|
Lunatrius` joined #minetest-dev |
| 01:26 |
|
Void7 joined #minetest-dev |
| 01:47 |
|
rubenwardy joined #minetest-dev |
| 01:56 |
|
Tmanyo joined #minetest-dev |
| 02:00 |
|
est31 joined #minetest-dev |
| 02:40 |
|
STHGOM joined #minetest-dev |
| 02:56 |
|
Zeno` joined #minetest-dev |
| 03:13 |
|
paramat joined #minetest-dev |
| 03:19 |
paramat |
hmmmm looks like #4135 could be merged now :) |
| 03:19 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/4135 -- Biomegen by kwolekr |
| 03:21 |
hmmmm |
Well, you guys can't find any problems and I can't see any... I tested it and things seem to be working fine |
| 03:21 |
hmmmm |
still kind of scary though |
| 03:21 |
hmmmm |
at least that's what i think, until i realize minetest is just a game... |
| 03:21 |
hmmmm |
nothing's going to explode if i got something wrong :D |
| 03:22 |
hmmmm |
guys, I'm gonna try the Merge pull request button now that it uses cherry pick |
| 03:22 |
hmmmm |
actually nevermind, you don't get an option to merge without squashing |
| 03:22 |
hmmmm |
I know it's messy but each of those commits do exactly one thing, and this way it makes it easier to track the root cause of a problem through bisection |
| 03:24 |
Zeno` |
press the button! |
| 03:24 |
Zeno` |
you know you want to... look at it... it's beautiful! Glowing like a jewel |
| 03:24 |
hmmmm |
it's actually not just pressing a button anymore |
| 03:24 |
sofar |
I find it easy enough to do merges in most cases |
| 03:25 |
hmmmm |
you have to press a second 'Confirm' button |
| 03:25 |
sofar |
but the squash merge works well for single-commit PRs |
| 03:25 |
Zeno` |
I've never pressed that button on github |
| 03:25 |
Zeno` |
"The button" I was referring to is a metaphorical button hehe |
| 03:25 |
hmmmm |
yikes |
| 03:25 |
hmmmm |
well, that's what a 4k line change looks like I guess |
| 03:26 |
sofar |
Fast-forwarded master to c4e083f7e142d8e25e906bb19f9b1f03bb7b430d. |
| 03:26 |
Zeno` |
I don't like it |
| 03:26 |
Zeno` |
lol :D |
| 03:27 |
hmmmm |
I'm conflicted |
| 03:27 |
hmmmm |
on one hand, 18 commits is a lot |
| 03:27 |
Zeno` |
it's ok |
| 03:27 |
hmmmm |
but at the same time, it's common sense that squashing should be for commits like |
| 03:27 |
hmmmm |
Add big feature here |
| 03:27 |
hmmmm |
"fix" |
| 03:27 |
hmmmm |
"Change variable names to XYZ" |
| 03:27 |
hmmmm |
"fix again" |
| 03:27 |
hmmmm |
"it works now" |
| 03:27 |
hmmmm |
git rebase -i HEAD~5 that shit |
| 03:28 |
Zeno` |
yeah, that should be squashed |
| 03:28 |
Zeno` |
but that's... "stuffing around" commits |
| 03:28 |
hmmmm |
yeah |
| 03:28 |
sofar |
I love rebase/fixup |
| 03:28 |
hmmmm |
also if I were to squash the whole thing into one commit we'd lose all the information about each thing done and how it's done |
| 03:28 |
Zeno` |
the thing is.. can I checkout each of those commits and it will build? |
| 03:29 |
hmmmm |
yes |
| 03:29 |
sofar |
biomegen stuff looks fine, I can't see a difference with v7 |
| 03:29 |
Zeno` |
and work? |
| 03:29 |
Zeno` |
ok well, it's fine then |
| 03:29 |
hmmmm |
I made sure of that |
| 03:29 |
hmmmm |
any one of those commits could have been cherry picked to master branch and work fine |
| 03:29 |
sofar |
does this change v6 drastically internally as well? |
| 03:29 |
hmmmm |
not quite |
| 03:30 |
hmmmm |
but yeah |
| 03:30 |
hmmmm |
my main motivation for keeping all the commits separate is to make it easy to debug, and also it'd be dishonest to stuff a zillion changes into a single huge commit to make it completely opaque |
| 03:33 |
Zeno` |
well it makes bisect quite a bit harder if it's a 4000k line commit as well :) |
| 03:34 |
Zeno` |
Does #4165 make sense? |
| 03:34 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/4165 -- teleporting players seems to use a queue |
| 03:34 |
Zeno` |
I would have expected that to be the behaviour |
| 03:35 |
hmmmm |
yeah same |
| 03:35 |
hmmmm |
I think our current behavior is fine, mods should stop writing things poorly |
| 03:36 |
sofar |
agreed |
| 03:36 |
hmmmm |
anyway if there are no final objections I'd like to merge $3919 |
| 03:36 |
hmmmm |
#3919 |
| 03:36 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/3919 -- Add base64 encoding and decoding to the lua api. by red-001 |
| 03:36 |
sofar |
hmmmm: +1 for that one |
| 03:37 |
hmmmm |
yeah it says two approvals but really it has like 4 |
| 03:37 |
hmmmm |
lol |
| 03:37 |
sofar |
yeah |
| 03:37 |
hmmmm |
merging... |
| 03:38 |
sofar |
#3888 ? |
| 03:38 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/3888 -- Particles: Remove particles on collision. by sofar |
| 03:38 |
hmmmm |
says it's wip |
| 03:39 |
sofar |
ah, I should learn to remove that label |
| 03:39 |
sofar |
removed |
| 03:39 |
hmmmm |
eww |
| 03:39 |
hmmmm |
} catch (...) {} |
| 03:40 |
hmmmm |
C++'s equivalent to On Error Resume Next |
| 03:40 |
hmmmm |
I used to be an On Error Resume Next coder... when I was 14 |
| 03:40 |
Zeno` |
yeah it's a great feature (/sarcasm) |
| 03:40 |
sofar |
I didn't add it! |
| 03:40 |
sofar |
lol |
| 03:40 |
hmmmm |
i know |
| 03:41 |
hmmmm |
i should've been mad when it was added |
| 03:41 |
paramat |
4135 is best not squashed i feel |
| 03:41 |
sofar |
our serialization code is chock full of it |
| 03:41 |
hmmmm |
yeah.. :/ |
| 03:41 |
hmmmm |
i'll take a look at 3888 |
| 03:42 |
hmmmm |
boy, ain't those particlespawner functions something? |
| 03:42 |
Zeno` |
I know it's just personal preference, but: |
| 03:42 |
Zeno` |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pull/3888/files#diff-6fa0632d20cfe987a56febe9c56fdd16R140 |
| 03:42 |
Zeno` |
I don't like chaining inits like that *shrug* |
| 03:42 |
hmmmm |
+350 |
| 03:42 |
sofar |
Zeno`: no, it's indeed ... unpleasant |
| 03:42 |
hmmmm |
sofar was just trying to maintain the existing "style" |
| 03:43 |
hmmmm |
that code is gross and should not be replicated though |
| 03:43 |
hmmmm |
i wish i never approved of the particlespawner but i was busy and people wanted it fast |
| 03:43 |
sofar |
the actual code in that PR is 2 lines or so, the rest is all just damn glue |
| 03:43 |
hmmmm |
yeah so how about that |
| 03:43 |
hmmmm |
pkt << id << vertical |
| 03:43 |
sofar |
hehehe |
| 03:44 |
hmmmm |
adding a field to a protocol that requires reverse compatibility and no screwups? |
| 03:44 |
hmmmm |
no need to be explicit |
| 03:44 |
hmmmm |
everybody knows that code that's more compact runs faster |
| 03:44 |
hmmmm |
for even faster code, eschew spaces between operators |
| 03:44 |
hmmmm |
also be sure to omit bounds checking |
| 03:45 |
hmmmm |
99.9% of the time the input is correct... so it's really just a waste of CPU |
| 03:45 |
Zeno` |
ah I see |
| 03:46 |
Zeno` |
existing style... the eternal PITA |
| 03:46 |
sofar |
the actual 2 lines of code are: |
| 03:46 |
sofar |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pull/3888/files#diff-e645b6869505fb7c2f21eed5098a56e4R138 |
| 03:46 |
sofar |
that and line 140 |
| 03:46 |
sofar |
lol |
| 03:48 |
hmmmm |
yeah could you change the chained initialization? |
| 03:52 |
sofar |
um |
| 03:52 |
sofar |
can I be honest? I know it looks ugly, but I've never had people slap me over the head that I write bad C++ code |
| 03:53 |
sofar |
because I've not written much OO code from scratch... |
| 03:53 |
|
DFeniks joined #minetest-dev |
| 03:54 |
Zeno` |
I wasn't slapping you on the head |
| 03:54 |
* Zeno` |
slaps sofar on the head. Stop it |
| 03:54 |
hmmmm |
what it's not bad code |
| 03:54 |
hmmmm |
just a matter of preferences and clarity |
| 03:54 |
sofar |
I need the head slapping, otherwise I likely won't learn |
| 03:54 |
hmmmm |
if it doesn't get fixed here, trust me, it'll never get fixed |
| 03:55 |
sofar |
but, no idea how to make it better myself |
| 03:55 |
sofar |
I mean, I guess I'd try and do away with the 20+ param list somehow |
| 03:55 |
hmmmm |
that's a little too much right now |
| 03:56 |
hmmmm |
pretty sure it's in violation of our existing code guidelines that inherit from the linux kernel style |
| 03:56 |
hmmmm |
i think there's a statement that says "no more than 7 arguments to a function" |
| 03:58 |
Zeno` |
apart from that it all looks good to me |
| 03:59 |
hmmmm |
maybe you should take Particles: pass texture as const std::string & and make that into a new PR that's "cleanup ParticleSpawner" or something, and we'll just merge the original commit |
| 03:59 |
sofar |
yeah |
| 04:00 |
sofar |
well, you can merge the bottom commit easily anyway, but sure |
| 04:00 |
|
Tmanyo joined #minetest-dev |
| 04:00 |
Zeno` |
hmmmm, I don't see that in the LKCS |
| 04:04 |
Zeno` |
it does say to use only 5-10 local variables |
| 04:04 |
hmmmm |
you're right |
| 04:04 |
hmmmm |
i don't know where i saw that |
| 04:05 |
hmmmm |
well, if it isn't in the LKCS perhaps it should be added to the wiki pages that adds to/modifies the LKCS |
| 04:08 |
hmmmm |
sofar I did it :( |
| 04:08 |
hmmmm |
did you want to merge it yourself? |
| 04:13 |
paramat |
#4165 should be closed i think |
| 04:13 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/4165 -- teleporting players seems to use a queue |
| 04:13 |
Zeno` |
I always ensure that there are less than 127 parameters in one function definition |
| 04:14 |
hmmmm |
is that the C standard maximum amount? |
| 04:14 |
Zeno` |
That way there is never a problem with http://port70.net/~nsz/c/c11/n1570.html#5.2.4.1p1 |
| 04:14 |
hmmmm |
sofar: could you comment on 4165 with your disagreement? |
| 04:34 |
paramat |
what's next for mapgen, perhaps creating the biomemap within generateBiomes()? |
| 04:36 |
paramat |
another issue is dungeongen using 2 point-polled 3D noises for mossycobble *=/ |
| 04:39 |
paramat |
mossycobble deserves maybe one 3D perlinmap at the most |
| 04:39 |
hmmmm |
mossycobble uses wetness and density |
| 04:40 |
hmmmm |
both of those noises by default have low spread values |
| 04:40 |
hmmmm |
if the spread value is under a certain point, bulk perlin noise generation loses its speed benefit |
| 04:40 |
paramat |
ok |
| 04:40 |
paramat |
but still overkill |
| 04:41 |
hmmmm |
what? a Noise object is what's overkill |
| 04:41 |
hmmmm |
do you realize how much memory overhead there is for one of those |
| 04:41 |
paramat |
i mean, lets use 1 3D noise for moss, if that |
| 04:42 |
Zeno` |
oh github has a revert button now |
| 04:42 |
paramat |
yeah i see what you mean |
| 04:42 |
Zeno` |
should I test it? heh |
| 04:42 |
hmmmm |
if you use one noise only it'll lose its characteristic shape |
| 04:43 |
paramat |
it won't be identical but that's not a problem |
| 04:44 |
hmmmm |
for some dungeon types there isn't any moss |
| 04:44 |
hmmmm |
maybe we can optimize a little by not converting cobble to moss if it's not wanted |
| 04:44 |
hmmmm |
i wanted the sand temple's moss to be cracked sandstone bricks |
| 04:45 |
paramat |
we could add a new node |
| 04:45 |
hmmmm |
yeah |
| 04:45 |
hmmmm |
but i don't have any texture making skills |
| 04:45 |
paramat |
anyway i think the distribution quality for moss will be good enough with 1 3D noise, perhaps i'll make a PR |
| 04:46 |
paramat |
no problem others can make new nodes |
| 04:47 |
hmmmm |
i think instead of relying on perlin noise so much, it should be used more cleverly |
| 04:47 |
hmmmm |
i'm getting bored of the patterns our noise typically makes |
| 04:48 |
paramat |
perhaps in new dungeon params the alternative node can be optional, for new-looking dungeons |
| 04:48 |
hmmmm |
all the dungeons are *supposed* to be old |
| 04:49 |
hmmmm |
i think our random processes look so un-random because perlin noise follows a normal distribution |
| 04:50 |
hmmmm |
i'm gonna eventually try retrofitting perlin noise to a different distribution such as cauchy instead |
| 04:50 |
hmmmm |
maybe we can get more interesting lookin patterns that way |
| 05:08 |
Zeno` |
hmmmm, I'm reviewing #3859 |
| 05:08 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/3859 -- Add minetest.check_password_entry callback by est31 |
| 05:09 |
Zeno` |
I'm assuming that your note from a day ago is the main outstanding issue? |
| 05:09 |
hmmmm |
I dunno, it's just that I feel like this is a function that most users are going to say "WTF" when they see it |
| 05:10 |
hmmmm |
there's also the part where it returns true, false, or nil |
| 05:12 |
Zeno` |
yeah that triple return type is a bit weird but it's not tooo bad as it indicates what went wrong |
| 05:12 |
hmmmm |
maybe |
| 05:12 |
hmmmm |
but what if somebody writes if (minetest.check_password_entry() == false) then ... fail authentication here ... |
| 05:13 |
Zeno` |
yeah |
| 05:13 |
Zeno` |
it might also be some obscure security flaw as well |
| 05:13 |
Zeno` |
it could probably just return false if formatting is incorrect as well |
| 05:14 |
Zeno` |
don't say what the error is... it doesn't really matter what the error is, the less the "user" knows the better probably |
| 05:14 |
hmmmm |
i'm still sorta confused on how this is supposed to be used |
| 05:14 |
hmmmm |
user enters the password from IRC, the mod has the auth.txt file I guess...? |
| 05:15 |
Zeno` |
yeah |
| 05:15 |
Zeno` |
and this provides a way to check it (?) |
| 05:16 |
hmmmm |
get_auth |
| 05:17 |
hmmmm |
if the get_auth callback returns nil then the login is denied |
| 05:18 |
Zeno` |
I think I'll have to look at irc_commands |
| 05:18 |
hmmmm |
the use case for this is so specific to a certain mod |
| 05:19 |
hmmmm |
i feel like this is almost a kludge of an interface |
| 05:19 |
Zeno` |
it's a mod used a lot though |
| 05:19 |
hmmmm |
right |
| 05:20 |
Zeno` |
hm |
| 05:21 |
Zeno` |
I must be missing something. Will wait for ShadowNinja I think |
| 05:22 |
Zeno` |
I'm having trouble visualising things after this discussion (I *thought* I was envisioning it clear earlier heh) |
| 05:22 |
Zeno` |
what does SN mean by "since Lua doesn't have access to SRP" |
| 05:22 |
Zeno` |
if it doesn't then this is what the PR adds ... isn't it? |
| 05:23 |
hmmmm |
like each of the SRP authentication functions |
| 05:23 |
hmmmm |
not really |
| 05:23 |
hmmmm |
it just adds a way to check a specific entry in auth.txt format against a username/pw |
| 05:23 |
Zeno` |
well only partially but enough to verify |
| 05:23 |
Zeno` |
yeah |
| 05:23 |
Zeno` |
oh i see |
| 05:23 |
hmmmm |
there is a function that exposes the original password hashing scheme to lua |
| 05:23 |
hmmmm |
but nothing for SRP |
| 05:23 |
hmmmm |
i think exposing SRP to lua would be a trainwreck tbh |
| 05:25 |
Zeno` |
I'll think about it a bit |
| 05:26 |
Zeno` |
I can't see many downsides to letting Lua verify a hash though (personally) |
| 05:27 |
OldCoder |
This is needed for me to have IRC mods |
| 05:27 |
OldCoder |
And, as ShadowNinja said... |
| 05:27 |
OldCoder |
The alternatives degrade security |
| 05:27 |
OldCoder |
To decline me the right to set security policies for my servers |
| 05:27 |
OldCoder |
as I see fit |
| 05:27 |
Zeno` |
Is there a limit on the number of password checks for a given username from a given IP? That's the only downside I can think of and it can be exploited without this change anyway |
| 05:27 |
OldCoder |
will actually decrease security |
| 05:28 |
OldCoder |
Upstream shouldn't really dictate to me what my policies should be. But unless you can counter ShadowNinja's points, those should be sufficient. |
| 05:29 |
OldCoder |
There are no workable alternatives for busy server owners with numerous worlds |
| 05:29 |
OldCoder |
hmmmm, how it works is simple. The patch goes in and I have IRC. |
| 05:30 |
OldCoder |
Did you ever try to monitor a dozen worlds at once without IRC? |
| 05:30 |
Zeno` |
So let me make sure I understand this. Currently to use a mod like irc_commands, for example, you have to use the old hash system? |
| 05:30 |
OldCoder |
Me? |
| 05:30 |
Zeno` |
anyone :) |
| 05:30 |
OldCoder |
I tried and I couldn't get it to work |
| 05:30 |
OldCoder |
None of the supposed alternatives worked |
| 05:31 |
OldCoder |
But, again, my own point, as opposed to ShadowNinja's points, is also valid |
| 05:31 |
Zeno` |
Well suppose the "old" hash system can be made to work. That's a horrible solution. This PR is better |
| 05:31 |
OldCoder |
Who has the right to tell me, or any server owner, what security model we need to use? |
| 05:31 |
Zeno` |
Nobody |
| 05:31 |
Zeno` |
Just making I understand the situation correctly |
| 05:32 |
Zeno` |
I think I do now and therefore support the PR 100% |
| 05:32 |
OldCoder |
Which means it's pretty imbalanced, now, even though, as you said, it isn't a vote per se |
| 05:32 |
hmmmm |
OldCoder: I prefer to understand how the patch works and what it does rather than focus on the results |
| 05:33 |
Zeno` |
Even if SN's point #1 did work I don't see that as a good way to do things because it's so easily exploited |
| 05:33 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/1 -- GlowStone code by anonymousAwesome |
| 05:33 |
OldCoder |
hmmmm, it is well understood, isn't it? It isn't a new patch or issue |
| 05:33 |
Zeno` |
yeah that one, ShadowBot LOL |
| 05:33 |
OldCoder |
The patch simply restores the feature... |
| 05:33 |
hmmmm |
maybe it's well understood to the people who work on the IRC mods |
| 05:33 |
OldCoder |
which was removed in this context. Isn't this so? |
| 05:33 |
hmmmm |
this function was previously existing and had been removed? |
| 05:34 |
OldCoder |
Moment, wording |
| 05:34 |
OldCoder |
He had to change some symbol names to work with the revised API, but the old and new code looked pretty similar to me |
| 05:34 |
OldCoder |
est31 would be the one to answer the question definitively |
| 05:35 |
OldCoder |
As near as I can tell, the PR puts code back in that was taken out, or reasonably similar code, reworked to match a new API |
| 05:35 |
OldCoder |
The result restores the functions that the IRC mods were calling before |
| 05:35 |
OldCoder |
Nothing has changed as far as they are concerned |
| 05:36 |
hmmmm |
right it's just that i don't know how this function that's being added is supposed to be used |
| 05:36 |
hmmmm |
look at it from my point of view |
| 05:36 |
OldCoder |
Which function is it? And, again, note that this is to restore removed functionality |
| 05:36 |
OldCoder |
It is not a new feature |
| 05:37 |
Zeno` |
I have to agree |
| 05:38 |
OldCoder |
If this introduces a vulnerability, can it be exploited without intentional use by the server owner? |
| 05:38 |
Zeno` |
If Lua cannot verify an SRP hash then... well, what's the point? |
| 05:39 |
Zeno` |
Surely there *needs* to be a way for mods to verify that |
| 05:39 |
* OldCoder |
is fine with the requirement to do a function call which says "Yes_This_Is_Dangerous()" |
| 05:39 |
OldCoder |
But do we really need to get as bad as Mozilla has gotten in this regard? |
| 05:39 |
hmmmm |
like I said, i think the point of this mod is to offer an alternative way of entering the username/password combo basically |
| 05:39 |
OldCoder |
"Yes, I want to visit that website. Yes, I mean it. Yes, I want to confirm it." |
| 05:39 |
Zeno` |
Lots of things are dangerous (I could have a keylogger installed for all I know hehe) |
| 05:39 |
OldCoder |
The only possible way, hmmmm... there is no alternative offered |
| 05:40 |
OldCoder |
That actually works and isn't less secure |
| 05:40 |
OldCoder |
See ShadowNinja's points in the thread |
| 05:40 |
OldCoder |
The change was put through without review of how it would affect server owners |
| 05:40 |
OldCoder |
Who, we may all agree, are not chopped liver |
| 05:42 |
Zeno` |
ShadowNinja's points are compelling |
| 05:42 |
OldCoder |
The net effect, ultimately, will be to *lower* security for us |
| 05:42 |
Zeno` |
And I cannot really think of a better way either |
| 06:09 |
hmmmm |
aaahh I see how it works now |
| 06:09 |
hmmmm |
okay nevermind |
| 06:09 |
hmmmm |
I should've read point 2 better |
| 06:10 |
hmmmm |
in any case, we have 5 approvals of the concept |
| 06:10 |
hmmmm |
ShadowNinja, Megaf, OldCoder, sofar, and me |
| 06:11 |
hmmmm |
nerzhul is the only one who doesn't like this, and I think it's a case that he doesn't exactly understand what this does |
| 06:12 |
hmmmm |
I already code reviewed it and aside from some nitpicky points about documentation (the people who this API function is for will already know what it is and how to use it), i think it looks fine. |
| 06:13 |
hmmmm |
Zeno`, would you do a quick code review of your own? (not approval of what it does necessarily) |
| 06:43 |
|
Taoki joined #minetest-dev |
| 06:44 |
|
Hunterz joined #minetest-dev |
| 07:01 |
Zeno` |
hmmmm, already have but will look again after dinner |
| 07:01 |
hmmmm |
guys |
| 07:01 |
Zeno` |
hmmmm, if it's only nit-picky stuff are you ok for me to merge if I don't find anything missed? |
| 07:01 |
|
Puka_ joined #minetest-dev |
| 07:02 |
hmmmm |
if you're doing some kind of review on something PLEASE post your answer in a clear :+1: or :-1: format on the corresponding issue/pr |
| 07:02 |
Zeno` |
hmmmm, I hadn't finished... got distracted with the conversation :) |
| 07:02 |
hmmmm |
otherwise it's assumed the review isn't done |
| 07:02 |
hmmmm |
or started |
| 07:02 |
hmmmm |
oh ok |
| 07:02 |
Zeno` |
I was ready to +1 but thought I'd discuss first (that's all) |
| 07:02 |
hmmmm |
yes I am okay with that PR as-is right now |
| 07:03 |
Zeno` |
Ok well merge. I'll add +1 if you like |
| 07:03 |
Zeno` |
gotta find the link.. /me scrolls up |
| 07:03 |
hmmmm |
i'll add a +1 too then |
| 07:03 |
Zeno` |
thanks. I will do another quick review after dinner and then merge |
| 07:04 |
hmmmm |
oh hold on |
| 07:04 |
Zeno` |
yeah |
| 07:04 |
Zeno` |
just saw |
| 07:04 |
hmmmm |
so you think we should just fix this ourselves and merge? |
| 07:04 |
Zeno` |
that needs fixing. I think it should just return false |
| 07:04 |
Zeno` |
(for invalid format) |
| 07:05 |
hmmmm |
I feel validated now that others share my concern :) |
| 07:05 |
Zeno` |
:) |
| 07:06 |
Zeno` |
est31 will be online soon(ish). I'll ask him to fix (even though it's simple) |
| 07:07 |
hmmmm |
yea i'm going soon so |
| 07:07 |
Zeno` |
np. Thanks for looking at it |
| 07:07 |
Zeno` |
and discussing |
| 07:11 |
OldCoder |
o/ |
| 07:28 |
|
Megal joined #minetest-dev |
| 07:30 |
|
Krock joined #minetest-dev |
| 08:51 |
|
Obani joined #minetest-dev |
| 08:51 |
|
Obani left #minetest-dev |
| 09:09 |
|
Megaf joined #minetest-dev |
| 10:08 |
paramat |
nore sfan5 please could you review game#1001 ? |
| 10:08 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest_game/issues/1001 -- Fire: move fire node removal out of ABM. by sofar |
| 10:13 |
sfan5 |
paramat: looks good |
| 10:15 |
paramat |
thanks |
| 10:17 |
|
Calinou joined #minetest-dev |
| 10:30 |
|
Calinou joined #minetest-dev |
| 10:56 |
Zeno` |
nore, paramat, et al, #4077 is ready I think |
| 10:56 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/4077 -- Colored chat and other strings by Ekdohibs |
| 10:56 |
Zeno` |
it's been ready for awhile |
| 10:57 |
Zeno` |
which unit test failed on the clang build? |
| 10:58 |
Zeno` |
oh that thing again... unrelated |
| 10:58 |
nore |
Zeno`: yeah, those failing unittests are annoying |
| 10:58 |
Zeno` |
IMO that PR has been open for so long and tested and reviewed by so many people it should just be merged so it can get wider testing |
| 10:59 |
Zeno` |
I think it might need some squashes though heh |
| 11:01 |
Zeno` |
which is tricky because some really should be separate commits |
| 11:01 |
Zeno` |
nore get onto that and let's merge! |
| 11:01 |
nore |
Zeno`: I'll squash things a bit |
| 11:03 |
paramat |
seems ok to merge this once squashed into fewer commits (although i haven't reviewed) |
| 11:05 |
|
Icedream joined #minetest-dev |
| 11:05 |
Zeno` |
It's been reviewed quite a bit and if it breaks something then now is the time to do it anyway (at the start of a new release cycle) |
| 11:05 |
Zeno` |
I even ran it through valgrind etc etc after reviewing the code. It seems fine to me |
| 11:06 |
paramat |
yeah and it's big, merge now before conflicts |
| 11:06 |
Zeno` |
I agree |
| 11:27 |
|
Samson1 joined #minetest-dev |
| 11:59 |
|
turtleman joined #minetest-dev |
| 12:03 |
|
Fixer joined #minetest-dev |
| 12:15 |
|
damiel joined #minetest-dev |
| 12:29 |
|
STHGOM joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:06 |
|
Obani joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:06 |
|
Obani left #minetest-dev |
| 13:09 |
|
xunto1 joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:16 |
|
Krock2 joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:29 |
|
kahrl joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:31 |
kahrl |
here's what I don't get about the colored chat PR |
| 13:31 |
kahrl |
where *exactly* does the freetype requirement come in? |
| 13:31 |
kahrl |
a standard IGUIFont can be drawn in any color perfectly fine |
| 13:31 |
kahrl |
is it here? https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pull/4077/files#diff-583b33dfdabe4843bcc9a2b6750720eaR155 |
| 13:32 |
kahrl |
I don't understand what the cast to CGUITTFont* is for, since IGUIFont has the same draw function |
| 13:32 |
kahrl |
(and why is there a "// FIXME"?) |
| 13:33 |
kahrl |
and what happens if someone compiles with freetype but then loads a bitmap font (which should be possible)? does the code attempt to cast something to CGUITTFont* that doesn't actually point to a CGUITTFont? |
| 13:36 |
|
CWz joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:37 |
|
CWz left #minetest-dev |
| 13:40 |
kahrl |
(sorry if that sounded like a rant, it wasn't meant to be... but I just don't understand that part) |
| 13:46 |
Zeno` |
nore, add a WIP please (based on our discussion) |
| 13:46 |
nore |
yep |
| 13:46 |
Zeno` |
and what kahrl says of course |
| 13:47 |
nore |
kahrl: the problem is per-character coloration |
| 13:47 |
nore |
and IGUIFont can't draw EnrichedString |
| 13:49 |
kahrl |
oh, you made changes to CGUITTFont, I didn't see that |
| 13:50 |
nore |
yep |
| 13:50 |
kahrl |
couldn't that be done outside the font though? |
| 13:52 |
kahrl |
I don't like making changes to bundled libraries, even though in this case it seems unlikely that the library would get any updates |
| 13:52 |
nore |
ehm, I'm not sure |
| 13:54 |
kahrl |
and there's the tight coupling between everything... ("#ifdef USE_FREETYPE" everywhere to switch between colored and non-colored chat, StaticText pretending to support a generic IGUIFont interface but actually only allowing CGUITTFont, and so on) |
| 13:55 |
|
paramat joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:55 |
|
Calinou joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:55 |
nore |
yeah, that's a problem :/ |
| 14:01 |
Zeno` |
kahrl, is there a font-related PR of yours that should be merged? |
| 14:01 |
Zeno` |
I vaguely recall seeing something but can't find it |
| 14:01 |
kahrl |
well, not really |
| 14:02 |
Zeno` |
hmm, ok. perhaps it's already in master |
| 14:02 |
kahrl |
I mean, there's #1699 but it's very unimportant and shouldn't cause conflicts |
| 14:02 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/1699 -- Remove xCGUITTFont.cpp and xCGUITTFont.h wrapper files by kahrl |
| 14:03 |
kahrl |
oh, someone marked it as rebase needed |
| 14:03 |
kahrl |
I'll just close it then |
| 14:03 |
Zeno` |
why wasn't it merged lol |
| 14:04 |
Zeno` |
it's from 2 years ago... no wonder I couldn't find it |
| 14:05 |
paramat |
will merge game#1110 game#1001 in a moment |
| 14:05 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest_game/issues/1110 -- Default: Bookshelf has 2 openings instead of 4 by paramat |
| 14:05 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest_game/issues/1001 -- Fire: move fire node removal out of ABM. by sofar |
| 14:06 |
Zeno` |
why can't we merge sensible stuff more quickly :( |
| 14:07 |
Fixer |
damn, i've just compiled minetest before this |
| 14:07 |
Zeno` |
I don't think you need to recompile because paramat is making changes to _game :P |
| 14:08 |
paramat |
correct |
| 14:08 |
paramat |
merging .. |
| 14:08 |
Fixer |
yes, need to update it manually |
| 14:08 |
Zeno` |
Fixer, we must use different workflows heh |
| 14:09 |
Fixer |
Zeno`: jenkins autocompilation for win and lin iirc |
| 14:09 |
Zeno` |
sounds tricky |
| 14:10 |
Fixer |
Zeno`: cdda does this, you just grab latest build and test...i mean play |
| 14:11 |
Fixer |
paramat: is this ok that i can hear weak fire sound even 1000 nodes away? |
| 14:11 |
Zeno` |
yeah, we use different workflows :P |
| 14:12 |
Fixer |
Zeno`: also, it seems they just merge all the things and fix in process %) |
| 14:14 |
Fixer |
Zeno`: 42 000 commits in 5 years |
| 14:14 |
Fixer |
Zeno`: 1200 open issues, 4600 closed ones |
| 14:14 |
Zeno` |
42! |
| 14:15 |
|
KaadmY joined #minetest-dev |
| 14:18 |
paramat |
merged |
| 14:18 |
|
Void7 joined #minetest-dev |
| 14:19 |
paramat |
Fixer seems not ok |
| 14:20 |
paramat |
fire sounds are a mess anyway, rejoin game and flames go silent |
| 14:23 |
Fixer |
right |
| 14:26 |
|
Grandolf joined #minetest-dev |
| 14:27 |
|
Grandolf joined #minetest-dev |
| 14:27 |
|
Grandolf joined #minetest-dev |
| 14:28 |
paramat |
'loop = true, -- only sounds connected to objects can be looped' but i don't see objects used |
| 14:30 |
paramat |
also the sounds should hopefully be mono |
| 14:31 |
paramat |
we need a new API for dealing with sounds like fire, running water |
| 14:32 |
Zeno` |
fix the leaks while you're at it :) |
| 14:33 |
paramat |
yeah they're mono |
| 14:35 |
paramat |
it wouldn't be popular but i would prefer silent fire to buggy sounds and heavy code |
| 14:46 |
Fixer |
paramat: they are mono, but for some reason they can be heared for very long distances |
| 14:48 |
paramat |
maybe because they're not attached to objects as required |
| 14:50 |
paramat |
seriously thinking we should delete all that hacky sound code |
| 14:57 |
|
Calinou joined #minetest-dev |
| 15:00 |
Fixer |
no way |
| 15:01 |
Fixer |
paramat: i think you can change sound attenuation with distance |
| 15:06 |
paramat |
max hear distance is already set to 16 nodes |
| 15:07 |
paramat |
game#1112 |
| 15:07 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest_game/issues/1112 -- Problems with sound code in fire mod |
| 15:38 |
|
Void7 joined #minetest-dev |
| 15:48 |
|
hmmmm joined #minetest-dev |
| 16:40 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:07 |
|
rubenwardy joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:47 |
|
paramat left #minetest-dev |
| 18:08 |
Hijiri |
someone could make an ear-cleaning mod with positional audio |
| 18:10 |
|
OldCoder joined #minetest-dev |
| 18:17 |
|
OldCoder joined #minetest-dev |
| 18:34 |
|
lisac joined #minetest-dev |
| 18:39 |
lisac |
VanessaE: Hello, are you there? |
| 18:39 |
OldCoder |
lisac, she may be asleep |
| 18:40 |
lisac |
Alright, is there anyone else here who knows about inchraNET irc here? |
| 18:40 |
lisac |
It seems to be down, or at least irc.inchra.net is. |
| 19:04 |
|
jin_xi joined #minetest-dev |
| 19:15 |
sfan5 |
lisac: please talk about that in #minetest |
| 19:15 |
sfan5 |
not here |
| 19:16 |
lisac |
Alright, sure. I stopped talking about it anyways :D |
| 20:20 |
|
DFeniks joined #minetest-dev |
| 20:22 |
|
Amaz joined #minetest-dev |
| 20:55 |
OldCoder |
Is there a feature known as mob despawn in the core and if so what does it do? |
| 20:55 |
OldCoder |
I.e. Do mobs evaporate for reasons other than lifetimer? |
| 20:56 |
OldCoder |
lisac, Hi. PM to discuss that. |
| 21:22 |
|
hmmmm joined #minetest-dev |
| 21:22 |
|
electrodude512 joined #minetest-dev |
| 21:42 |
kahrl |
OldCoder: mobs are not a concept known to the core, thus there is no mob despawn in the core |
| 21:43 |
kahrl |
(there are various ways in which the core might delete objects/entities, but none of those are specific to mobs) |
| 21:46 |
OldCoder |
kahrl, thank you |
| 21:48 |
sofar |
OldCoder: my prototype sheep never despawn, the engine unloads/reloads them as areas get emerged and unloaded, but other mob apis don't do it that way |
| 21:55 |
OldCoder |
sofar, thank you |
| 22:42 |
|
Void7 joined #minetest-dev |
| 22:52 |
|
rubenwardy joined #minetest-dev |
