Moderator: Community Team
Metsfanmax wrote:When given the choice between a new tag and changing gameplay mechanics, I'd opt for the former. Changing the way bonuses, etc. are calculated shouldn't be done just to enable a new feature, unless everyone agrees that it's the right thing for all future maps.
Kabanellas wrote:Well, I think the first choice seems the easiest and simpler.
As I don't see any way in which the older maps could be affected by it (KN will still be KN, and they are not part of continents unless you add them), I'd totally support it
koontz1973 wrote:Kabanellas wrote:Well, I think the first choice seems the easiest and simpler.
As I don't see any way in which the older maps could be affected by it (KN will still be KN, and they are not part of continents unless you add them), I'd totally support it
Kabs, get the first post updated then with exactly what you want seen done. Which as far as I can see is to have a change in the way the xml is read. when done, the suggestion guys should be happy enough to bung this back to the boss man.
degaston wrote:There is another way it could be done that might also help with future XML changes. If a <version> tag was added to the start of the XML file specifying which version it was written for, then the game code for previous versions could be locked, and new features would be guaranteed to have no effect on anything that came before it. If the tag is not there, it would be assumed to be for version 1.0. With this, XML and game engine changes would be easier to implement, and tags could be updated or retired as needed without concern for maintaining backwards compatibility.
Metsfanmax wrote:degaston wrote:There is another way it could be done that might also help with future XML changes. If a <version> tag was added to the start of the XML file specifying which version it was written for, then the game code for previous versions could be locked, and new features would be guaranteed to have no effect on anything that came before it. If the tag is not there, it would be assumed to be for version 1.0. With this, XML and game engine changes would be easier to implement, and tags could be updated or retired as needed without concern for maintaining backwards compatibility.
Version control for the XML is actually a pretty good idea and something we should consider separately. Can I encourage you to make a separate thread?
degaston wrote:There is another way it could be done that might also help with future XML changes. If a <version> tag was added to the start of the XML file specifying which version it was written for, then the game code for previous versions could be locked, and new features would be guaranteed to have no effect on anything that came before it. If the tag is not there, it would be assumed to be for version 1.0. With this, XML and game engine changes would be easier to implement, and tags could be updated or retired as needed without concern for maintaining backwards compatibility.
koontz1973 wrote:Kabs, get the first post updated then with exactly what you want seen done. Which as far as I can see is to have a change in the way the xml is read. when done, the suggestion guys should be happy enough to bung this back to the boss man.
chapcrap wrote:SUBMITTED
Users browsing this forum: No registered users