[slipperman]

This may seem to be an odd question to ask, but I do have a legitimate reason!!

Attached is the relevant part of the Open Rails manual.

My question is :
Does the "ORTSUserPreferenceRemoveForestTreesFromRoads" entry have to immediately follow the "ORTSUserPreferenceForestClearDistance" entry, or may it be anywhere after it?

Cheers,
Ged

Attached thumbnail(s)

• 

[R H Steele]

slipperman, on 15 August 2021 - 11:18 AM, said:

This may seem to be an odd question to ask, but I do have a legitimate reason!!

Attached is the relevant part of the Open Rails manual.

My question is :
Does the "ORTSUserPreferenceRemoveForestTreesFromRoads" entry have to immediately follow the "ORTSUserPreferenceForestClearDistance" entry, or may it be anywhere after it?

Cheers,
Ged

From my reading of the manual, I would keep them together, one-after-the-other. AFAIK, from discussions here and my usage you could probably put them together in a block:

Attached thumbnail(s)

• 

[steved]

ELI5, shouldn't trees be kept off of the tracks and roads by default?
Does this need to be an option?

[Csantucci]

Checking whether there are forest trees on roads and tracks requires computing time. If a route doesn't have such trees, there is no need to waste such computing time. Thus the option to perform the check only on routes where it is needed.

[slipperman]

Hi,
@Gerry : Many thanks for your suggestion - you will now have received my PM on the subject!

@Everybody else : Thank you for looking! My query has now been resolved to the satisfaction of Open Rails!!

Cheers,
Ged