[Genma Saotome]

 conductorchris, on 28 December 2021 - 06:43 PM, said:

Barry, I actually think the include model is a good one for activities. Even better if you could randomly pick from a list of possible includes.
But I know Ryan has been thinking a lot about new file formats and has been leaning to JSON.

Christopher

.json format was identified a long time ago as what new files should use.

[Amtrak115]

 Weter, on 28 December 2021 - 06:02 PM, said:

So, You can guess, what I would ask ;)

I've seen and tried to run the "Activity Editor" as well as looked at the code. The rational for starting with Trackviewer, is not that I think it's flawed or missing something...it's because I like the way it works...it's simple.... I've done some activity building with TSRE, and While it works...I find that having to move between trackviewer, TSRE, Notepad++, a little cumbersome...So my objective, when I started this little challenge, was could the functions coexist within the same framework. Now I could have simply asked the question or posed it as a future enhancement, but I decided to take the next step and figure out the code and make it do what I want. so I created my own repository based on PerpetualKid's Ultimate version which I believe he keeps close to "Open Rails NewYears MG" version...he also had started "cleaning up the code and refactoring some of it, making it more efficient and able to handle larger routes. After getting into (been away from coding for awhile so figuring out Object-oriented programming was/has/still-is a challenge, but and educational experience). There are some things that I would like to do, but I also wanted to stay within the boundaries of the OR baseline...i.e. completely compatible. Things such as Dockable window panels would make editing a whole lot easier and take advantage of multiple monitors or very large monitors. one of the things I'm working on currently is that when you "Load a Path", then save it, I'll save a copy as it exist today (.pat - MSTS compatible) and a JSON version (.PATH-OR....I think that's right). knowing that OR doesn't have the capability to load a JSON path...(Not yet....) Activities will be the same as far as I have planned them. If you look at the screen shot of what I'm calling the "Toolbox" (Mainly to distiquish itself from "Trackviewer", you'll see a menu item called "Crazy Ideas"...and that's exactly what it is....a place to me to test/look at "Crazy Ideas"!!!

anyway back to the code....

Barry

Attached thumbnail(s)

• 

[conductorchris]

Your rational is a good one.

[Eldorado.Railroad]

 Amtrak115, on 30 December 2021 - 09:24 AM, said:

anyway back to the code....

Hi Barry,

Thank you for undertaking this quest. A few questions:

1. Under what version of windows are you compiling and testing?

2. Could I ask you to look at this: http://www.elvastowe...post__p__279189

3) Is there a beta version that you are working on that I can test to see whether 2. is still an issue?

In my case ALL other executables supplied in OR 1.4 run in Win7 64/32, except Trackviewer whose error.failure is described in 2. Any help in resolving this issue would be greatly appreciated, It is not clear as of this writing who ported the XNA version of Trackviewer in OR 1.3 to Monogame/SharpDX, but it does seem that testing in Win7 64/32 was exhaustively completed, hence it does not work.

Like many of the contributed programs, there is no debugging information available for Trackviewer, it either works or not. It makes diagnosing startup failures impossible to track down.

Thank you for you time, patience, and help with this issue,
Steve

[Amtrak115]

 Eldorado.Railroad, on 30 December 2021 - 04:27 PM, said:

1. Under what version of windows are you compiling and testing?

2. Could I ask you to look at this: http://www.elvastowe...post__p__279189

3) Is there a beta version that you are working on that I can test to see whether 2. is still an issue?

In my case ALL other executables supplied in OR 1.4 run in Win7 64/32, except Trackviewer whose error.failure is described in 2. Any help in resolving this issue would be greatly appreciated, It is not clear as of this writing who ported the XNA version of Trackviewer in OR 1.3 to Monogame/SharpDX, but it does seem that testing in Win7 64/32 was exhaustively completed, hence it does not work.

Steve

Steve. To answer your questions......

1. using Windows 10

2. I've seen that thread and followed it. While I cannot directly answer the question I've made a note to look for any indications/code related to that.

3. As of this time, my development is not to the point where I'd put out a beta, or pre-beta....I've only been mucking with code in the last couple of weeks so to say I'm just starting is an under-statment.

I don't have anything running Win7 anymore here......

Barry

[Amtrak115]

 Weter, on 30 December 2021 - 08:54 PM, said:

So, TSRE's AE still needs another utility for making paths, right?
And, my "silly" question was:
why not to complete alfa-stage ORTS AE to full-functional state, rather overloading contributed TrackViewer (which is simple and complete, but needs some updates, though) with activity-editing functions?
Three is a bit of risk, IMHO, that TV would loss its simplicity and lightweight, though it has a chance to become more powerful and universal tool, OTOH.
But why ORTS AE then? Hasn't it some good starting abilities already? Isn't there any sense to continue it's development? BTW, your screenshot's gamma looks similar to AE.

you're correct TSRE does not have a path editing capability, there are some things with saving Traffic files that don't work right (there a "work-around" that sort-of works most of the time).

completing the AE that in the releases (OR, OR-Testing, OR-unstable, OR-NYMG) was something I thought about when I started this adventure. I picked TV because it was simple, and I wanted to understand how track date, paths, etc, were handled by the simulator. (flat, text files, or whatever the label used to identify the what MSTS stores files always seemed to me to be a very archaic of storing data files. while I'm not a big computer gamer, there just seem to me that there had to be a better way. ORTS was initially "charted" to replace, then enhance MSTS...personally I think its time for ORTS to make the leap and leave the past behind...my opinion and mine alone) I also pick the baseline (Ultimate) because PerpetualKid had already started some refactoring of the code to improve it's performance and to better handle larger routes. (He also had integrated RailDriver into the baseline which is what I use when running OR). Currently the way it's being implemented the "Contributed" version of TV is not changed or modified and can still be selected to run from the "Options" menu of OR.

finally there's one other reason....I had to start somewhere.....

Barry

[Amtrak115]

 Genma Saotome, on 26 December 2021 - 11:32 PM, said:

The alternative is the player is the conductor. What a real conductor gets to work from is an ordered list of cars in the train and a handful of waybills that tells him where to leave them. He has to figure out where to stop, what switches to throw, which cars to pull off, and where to drop them. The engineer follows his instructions as do the brakies. If he is good them all goes quickly. If not the rest of the crew pick up PDQ that he doesn't know jack and it's going to a lot of wasted time getting across the division.

Dave, Sorry to circle back to this....but (this is funny), while I was out walking the dog this morning....something came to me......but.....If we had a ....I'm going to call it a "work-order" ,for the sake of this conversation, editor, that basically define a set of "Activities" that were to executed to complete the work order....here's my idea....(dog had a long walk this morning)...Work-Order Name: Local trains.
Activity 1. probably a manual operation (need to think this through more...) Construct a train from cars in yard...
Activity 2. Train local proceeds to "Drop1"
Activity 3. Drop1 manually drops/pickups some cars on identified siding
Activity 4. Proceed to Drop2
Activity 5. Drop2 manually drops/pickups some cars on identified siding
....... Activities 2/3 repeated
Activity x. Train local returns to home yard and ties up for the night....
Work-order complete.....


I know it's simplistic, but am I getting the idea....(fyi, I started out as a railfan, Model Railroader, then Train simmer and have learned a lot about railroad operation....but I have no "actual" experience....being an ex Air Force Officer/Gov't Contractor dealing with Operations Command and Control software....)

Barry

[Weter]

Thank You, Barry. Hope, I see now.
Well, You are right, telling so.
So good luck, then.
It's definitely, that TSRE's AE is incomplete (and not enough) too.
That was just my opinion, that TV is good to be left as an utility for all about tracks.
But there can be different opinions :)

Happy new year.

[Genma Saotome]

 Amtrak115, on 31 December 2021 - 09:52 AM, said:

Dave, Sorry to circle back to this....but (this is funny), while I was out walking the dog this morning....something came to me......but.....If we had a ....I'm going to call it a "work-order" ,for the sake of this conversation, editor, that basically define a set of "Activities" that were to executed to complete the work order....here's my idea....(dog had a long walk this morning)...Work-Order Name: Local trains.
Activity 1. probably a manual operation (need to think this through more...) Construct a train from cars in yard...
Activity 2. Train local proceeds to "Drop1"
Activity 3. Drop1 manually drops/pickups some cars on identified siding
Activity 4. Proceed to Drop2
Activity 5. Drop2 manually drops/pickups some cars on identified siding
....... Activities 2/3 repeated
Activity x. Train local returns to home yard and ties up for the night....
Work-order complete.....

Barry

Yes, that is about right. I might have used the word task, or perhaps better: work, than to use Activity where you did as we're all used to that word covering the entire journey. I suppose to keep the signalling system happy one needs to "formally" go manual and then when done return to "programmed" before leaving town.

If you ever see an old book called "Let's Operate a Railroad" at a reasonable price buy it. It is 1920-1960 railroading from the point of view of individual roles -- car toad, yardmaster, conductor, and to a lesser degree, dispatcher. Self published.

[Genma Saotome]

 ThebraveT1, on 04 January 2022 - 04:22 PM, said:

The code? uh ok...

Yes, the code. As in what you get when you work in C# programming language.

<Admin Comment>
Please refrain from such ultra short posts that are essentially nothing but reaction text, (e.g., "Wow!" and/or "uh ok...."). I'm tired of reading the complaints about it. Say something people want to read. Try some screenshots. Got a serious question to ask? Ask it. Got an answer that hasn't already been posted? Post it. Nobody wants to read reaction text. Think before writing. You'll eventually figure out how to participate as well as anyone else