openmw.org

This post is related to Bug#3427. Essentially, moving or deleting references from a parent add-on/plugin/gamefile is broken.

I've started looking again at some of the issues with invalid content file numbers being saved in plugins. I believe that I have found one of the problems. In the editor, content file numbers are being expressed relative to the master file. Instead, content file numbers should be expressed relative to the active plugin.

So another issue seems to be that the index of a master file isn't being assigned in the loading code. What's more, the field cannot be properly modified outside of the ESM loading code since it is only retrievable as a constant reference. The game engine seems to get around this by using a const_cast.

O Aeslywinn hear my plea!

Continue your good work, and pay no mind to the 1.0 roundtable thread. For a long time the engine got constant updates from Scrawl while progress on OpenMW-CS was abysmal. Thanks to you it is finally catching up, but now that Scrawl is on a break impatient forum-dwellers want to rush straight to 1.0 - neither being prepared nor having the workforce. Please heed them not, for haste makes waste. It is better to deliver a finished release that goes beyond expectations rather than an underwhelming one with unfinished components.

It was my understanding that the "1.0" release for OpenMW and OpenMW-CS were going to be handled separately? Did something change, or am I mistaken?

To thou who art destined to die,
I understand your worries and hear your cry.

The game engine nears it's 1.0 peak,
but the editor lags behind what we seek.
While it is useful to a certain degree,
its lacking some features; on this all agree.

Alas, unfortunately this is not all,
for the Brotherhood strikes, to much appall.
Much testing and fixing remains to be done.
This shall be completed before version one.

Released it shall be, when the editor is complete,
though OpenMW may reach version 1.0 before that feat.

We need a hand clapping smilie over here.

Shakespeare wrote:To be, or not to be- that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer -- Ah, forget about this!

aesylwinn wrote:To thou who art destined to die,
I understand your worries and hear your cry.

The game engine nears it's 1.0 peak,
but the editor lags behind what we seek.
While it is useful to a certain degree,
its lacking some features; on this all agree.

Alas, unfortunately this is not all,
for the Brotherhood strikes, to much appall.
Much testing and fixing remains to be done.
This shall be completed before version one.

Released it shall be, when the editor is complete,
though OpenMW may reach version 1.0 before that feat.

*thunderous applause*
(Please don't comment on issues with the measure here. )

I'm going to have to nitpick here. You called him 'thou' and then immediately said you understand 'your' worries and hear 'your' cry, but 'your' is derived from 'you', which (in Shakespeare's era, which I think is what you're going for) is the formal version of 'thou', and you can't mix and match 'you' and 'thou'. Instead, you should have used 'thy'.

If you weren't going for Shakespearean era English, then it's even more wrong, as 'you' was the plural version of 'thou', so you just called DestinedToDie a group of people... although his opinion may not be uncommon, in which case, it would work. Okay, you check out. Move along.

My kingdom for a "thy!" I was mostly attempting to sound archaic, to fit DestinedToDie's flowery language, so I wasn't paying much attention to older grammar or the use of a well defined meter. However, I'll keep it in mind for the next time I spontaneously burst into verse.

AnyOldName3 wrote: If you weren't going for Shakespearean era English, then it's even more wrong, as 'you' was the plural version of 'thou', so you just called DestinedToDie a group of people... although his opinion may not be uncommon, in which case, it would work. Okay, you check out. Move along.

This is really interesting for a Swede and an Old Norse nerd. This means that "thou" = nordic "du" (which are obviously related) and "you" = nordic "ni". I've always found it funny that you english knigggts don't have separate words for you (one person) and you (two or more) (well, southern US people do have "y'all", but that's dialect). At the same time I've always wondered what the difference between thou and you was. Now this explained it all. You had separate words for it, but not anymore.