Code center > Suggestions
lets fix it
Botsareus:
about my placement control ... all I want to know is if it will work the same in c++ Numsgil.
Sounds like 2.4 can actualy work once the "Once I figure out the GUI problems, it should be as smooth as butter." is done. I will try it , I just don't want you to release a 1meg worth of a virsion every time somthing new is fixed, because half time when somthing is fixed somthing else is broken.
Numsgil:
Probably not, since C++ has no built in GUI. Wolfhound is looking into FoxWindows I think it's called.
I dropped the DLL, so new versions aren't like tht initial beta one was.
shvarz:
Wow, such heated discussions!
:shoot:
:shoot:
:shoot:
But seriously, Nums, why do you want to have a 2.4 VB version for which there are almost no bots. You are certainly not planning on maintaining two versions, one in VB and one in C+, right? So, once you switch to C+, we'll end up with 2.4 as the last VB version, and I think it sucks (not the version, but the fact that 2.4 is last).
Why don't we call 2.36 version a finished product, for which there will be tons of bots and which would come as a package with everything ready? It is (or will be) a bug-free version. Yes, it is not going to be the latest and the greatest, but it will have its own niche, its own rules and its own feel.
The new version with all the fun stuff you introduced in 2.4 would be moved completely to C+ and will be maintained there. I think there is enough new features to call it 3.0. BUT!!! You decide on what features you want to have in there before you release any versions (even to us) and then stick with those features through the whole version 3 development. Don't add or remove any major things that affect bot survival.
Botsareus:
You mean you got rid of the DLL? I still won't release 500 lines of code just because 4 are changed. . .
But hey, never mind, do what ever you want because I don't really release code anyway for anything anyway...
Numsgil:
I don't care too much about Nomenclature. We can call whichever whatever we want.
I didn't upgrade 2.4 to a whole new major version number for nothing. But if you think it should be 3.0 when porting is finished, I'm cool with that too.
Problem is if I maintain two versions at once (pre 2.4 and 2.4) I get confused. So if we want to make 2.37 the standard, bug free final release type of thing, someone else will need to be the one to go through and fix bugs.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version