Goku, on 18 September 2016 - 01:25 PM, said:
That's excellent Goku, thank you!
I updated the blueprint and here are the .exe and .dll files to be replaced within x.3627 to test the feature.
Multiplecarspawner.zip (1.16MB)
Number of downloads: 349
Now I hope this is OK for James to approve the blueprint. If there are still refinements needed, I'll see if I can implement them.
And here some rationale about what has been done, which is also a reply to Dave.
I had stopped working on this feature, because OR features could not rely on a development tool that was not open, with the risk that such development tool would die, or become strictly proprietary, or go towards directions incompatible with OR, leaving such feature unsupported.
This has radically changed now that TSRE is licensed under the GNU license. Even if Goku would go his own way, incompatible with OR, the sources are there and starting from them it is possible to get a TSRE version compatible with OR, and even growing with it.
By the way this specific case showed that a fruitful cooperation between Goku and the OR development team is possible, providing simple and fast solutions.
My opinion is that TSRE is becoming the de-facto route editor for OR, even if it is still a work in progress.
So I don't agree with the objections of Dave:
- TSRE is still work in progress? OR is this too. Waiting that TSRE work is 100% complete to implement new functions is the same than saying that one does not want to use TSRE to implement new functions
- Goku has his own mind and could go his own ways? Well, in this case he has been cooperative and also very fast. Not only, he was also propositive and in fact suggested a "cleaner" solution. If Goku won't be cooperative in the future (which I hope won't succeed) there is always the escape way to autonomously proceed from the TSRE source files.
- OR already has additional features that are "deleted" using the standard MSTS development tools to modify the files; this is true both for the cabview editor and the activity editor; for the new feature under discussion there is an advantage: files are generated by a development tool, and don't need to be hand edited. Moreover:
- This functional improvement can still be simply achieved by hand editing the .w file. In fact, when I tested it, I did so, because I didn't have yet the updated TSRE.
- With this improvement standard MSTS car spawners are still interpreted correctly both by OR and TSRE, which in my opinion is mandatory, and moreover the OR-specific car spawners don't cause problems to MSTS, which in my opinion is desirable, but not mandatory.
Finally, Dave, I am always very thankful to you for hosting OR discussion and in general appreciate your contributions, but I was quite annoyed in reading these words against my development: "James has spent much of the last 3 or 4 years squashing actions like this; I expect if he were around this week he'd already be shouting no. As I've been told no so many times I think I have a fairly good understanding of what causes him to say no. Maybe he'll surprise me when he learns of this but I don't expect that."
That's not the way to express disagreement. I'm spending my time generating new features and must read that.