| Time |
Nick |
Message |
| 00:32 |
|
P0p_ joined #minetest |
| 00:35 |
|
perrier joined #minetest |
| 01:00 |
|
minduser00 joined #minetest |
| 01:06 |
|
Taoki joined #minetest |
| 01:19 |
|
Conradish006 joined #minetest |
| 01:20 |
|
LaCosa joined #minetest |
| 02:00 |
|
kawaiipunk joined #minetest |
| 02:07 |
|
Jhalman joined #minetest |
| 02:29 |
|
dasani joined #minetest |
| 02:38 |
|
perrier joined #minetest |
| 03:58 |
specing |
Is there a construct in minetest lua that would be like assert, but instead of raising an exception it'd return from function? |
| 03:59 |
specing |
I have a lot of code of the form if cond then print("bla"); return X; end |
| 04:00 |
specing |
It'd also be nice if the print call could be replaced by some log function |
| 04:29 |
|
xSmurf joined #minetest |
| 04:55 |
|
Seirdy joined #minetest |
| 05:00 |
|
MTDiscord joined #minetest |
| 06:08 |
|
Flabb joined #minetest |
| 06:09 |
SX |
specing possible with coroutines at least but not sure if it is that good idea really... |
| 06:11 |
SX |
and pcall of course if you want to catch exceptions thrown by assertions but again gets bit complicated to make difference between assert and other faults |
| 06:13 |
|
jonadab joined #minetest |
| 06:16 |
SX |
but yeah, can do something like return_if(1 < 2, "Omg 1 is still less than 2") |
| 06:26 |
|
NathanS21 joined #minetest |
| 06:31 |
|
greeter joined #minetest |
| 06:48 |
|
sagax joined #minetest |
| 07:22 |
|
SwissalpS joined #minetest |
| 07:25 |
|
m42uko joined #minetest |
| 07:45 |
|
aheinecke joined #minetest |
| 08:00 |
|
ShadowNinja joined #minetest |
| 08:36 |
|
FeXoR joined #minetest |
| 08:47 |
|
greeter joined #minetest |
| 09:01 |
|
absurb joined #minetest |
| 09:28 |
|
calcul0n joined #minetest |
| 10:38 |
dgsomerton |
happy to report, all is working. I managed to isolate the server that was blocking me, sent the ticket in and a few minutes later it was unblocked.. Thanks for the help. |
| 10:53 |
|
proller joined #minetest |
| 11:20 |
|
Fixer joined #minetest |
| 11:41 |
|
submariner joined #minetest |
| 11:49 |
|
calcul0n_ joined #minetest |
| 12:28 |
sfan5 |
that's great |
| 12:32 |
|
Aris joined #minetest |
| 12:40 |
|
dgsomerton joined #minetest |
| 12:49 |
|
greeter joined #minetest |
| 13:03 |
|
proller joined #minetest |
| 13:23 |
|
Conradish006 joined #minetest |
| 13:24 |
|
Conradish006 joined #minetest |
| 13:47 |
|
seeker_ joined #minetest |
| 13:48 |
|
Wuzzy joined #minetest |
| 13:49 |
|
seeker_ joined #minetest |
| 13:53 |
Wuzzy |
What is the difference between /clearobjects quick and /clearobjects full? |
| 13:54 |
Wuzzy |
(apart from speed, obviously) |
| 13:54 |
Wuzzy |
Or to put it in a different way: What makes /clearobjects quick "quick"? |
| 13:58 |
MTDiscord |
<wwar> I guess (not sure) /clearobjects quick 1-Clears objects in a not very big place. Or, 2-Do not clear all kinds of objects. |
| 14:21 |
celeron55 |
Wuzzy: full goes through every generated block, quick just deletes objects from whatever blocks are loaded |
| 14:21 |
Wuzzy |
ok |
| 14:22 |
Wuzzy |
hmmm i just found a description in lua_api.txt... |
| 14:22 |
Wuzzy |
"Clear objects immediately in loaded mapblocks, clear objects in unloaded mapblocks only when the mapblocks are next activated." |
| 14:22 |
Wuzzy |
I don't understand the 2nd part of that sentence. |
| 14:22 |
Wuzzy |
"only when the mapblock are next activated"? What does "next activated" mean here? |
| 14:25 |
celeron55 |
i have no idea what that means |
| 14:26 |
celeron55 |
i don't think anything special happens in either mode |
| 14:28 |
MTDiscord |
<Jonathon> I know someone who did clearobjects full on a server, locked it up for a hour? At least the way it was explained to me is clearobjects just removes objects in loaded areas, while clearobjects full goes through the whole map and removes them |
| 14:32 |
sfan5 |
Wuzzy: the engine stores a timestamp of when clearobjects was last run somewhere |
| 14:33 |
sfan5 |
then when a new block is loaded and it's older than the clearobjects timestamp, all objects are removed |
| 14:33 |
Wuzzy |
huh? |
| 14:33 |
Wuzzy |
so a /clearobjects quick can affect objects long after I executed it? |
| 14:33 |
sfan5 |
n? |
| 14:33 |
sfan5 |
no? |
| 14:34 |
Wuzzy |
hmm |
| 14:34 |
Wuzzy |
do you mean, when a new block is loaded *during* the execution of /clearobjects quick? |
| 14:34 |
sfan5 |
any time after |
| 14:34 |
Wuzzy |
hmmm |
| 14:35 |
sfan5 |
it will delay object clearing to when a block is next loaded, while /clearobjects full literally goes and loads each block to remove the objects and save it again |
| 14:35 |
sfan5 |
that's it |
| 14:35 |
Wuzzy |
ok so I do /clearobjects quick, a few objects die, then after 1 hour a player moves to a new mapblock, loading it. |
| 14:35 |
Wuzzy |
and all objects in this NEW loaded mapblocks die as well? |
| 14:35 |
sfan5 |
how is the mapblock "new"? |
| 14:36 |
Wuzzy |
newly loaded* |
| 14:36 |
sfan5 |
yes |
| 14:36 |
Wuzzy |
bad language, sorry |
| 14:36 |
Wuzzy |
wow, ok. |
| 14:36 |
Wuzzy |
interesting. |
| 14:36 |
sfan5 |
even more simplified: it will mark all blocks as needing their objects cleared |
| 14:38 |
celeron55 |
where is the clearobjects timestamp stored |
| 14:39 |
sfan5 |
env_meta.txt |
| 14:40 |
celeron55 |
ok now i see where that happens |
| 14:41 |
celeron55 |
so due to this it barely makes sense to ever run full clearobjects as this should be completely transparent to any gameplay or server processing |
| 14:41 |
Wuzzy |
yeah, i also see now that /clearobjects full doesnt really make much sense anymore |
| 14:42 |
Wuzzy |
slightly related question: How do I "get" an object in an area that is not loaded (or I have not checked if its loaded)? |
| 14:42 |
sfan5 |
you don't |
| 14:42 |
Wuzzy |
? |
| 14:43 |
Wuzzy |
i suppose the only way to be sure is to emerge first? |
| 14:43 |
Wuzzy |
when the emerge finishes, can i be sure that all objects have appeared at this time? |
| 14:43 |
sfan5 |
are objects active in forceloaded blocks? dunno |
| 14:44 |
Wuzzy |
not forceloaded. minetest.emerge_area |
| 14:44 |
sfan5 |
(because just emerging a block will not activate the objects) |
| 14:44 |
Wuzzy |
oh jeez |
| 14:45 |
Wuzzy |
objects are really tricky to deal with in lua |
| 14:46 |
calcul0n_ |
i played a bit with forceload, it looks like entities stay active there |
| 14:47 |
calcul0n_ |
and yes, emerge is probably not enough |
| 14:51 |
MTDiscord |
<wwar> I suggest (somehow) make the /clearobjects quick do not clear tamed mobs.. |
| 14:52 |
sfan5 |
Wuzzy: I wouldn't mind if your PR removed /clearobjects full entirely |
| 14:53 |
Wuzzy |
idk. maybe there is a weird fringe reason for people to use /clearobjects full. my PR was only about usability anyway, soo. not removing any features in this pr. |
| 14:53 |
|
perrier joined #minetest |
| 14:54 |
celeron55 |
well if you want to clean up a map for sharing |
| 14:54 |
celeron55 |
or archiving or something |
| 14:54 |
sfan5 |
I wrote a python script that can recompress a map (saving up to 30% or something) and clear objects/meta/whatever months ago but haven't gotten around to releasing it |
| 14:57 |
Wuzzy |
sfan5: BleachBit is also capable of compressing maps if they are in SQLite format |
| 14:57 |
sfan5 |
that's just sqlite's VACCUM |
| 14:58 |
|
greeter joined #minetest |
| 14:59 |
Wuzzy |
haha @greeter has fun with IPv6 |
| 15:07 |
|
Taoki[mobile] joined #minetest |
| 15:07 |
|
MadScientist joined #minetest |
| 15:15 |
|
lisac joined #minetest |
| 15:22 |
|
mlucena joined #minetest |
| 15:24 |
|
kamdard joined #minetest |
| 15:40 |
|
erlehmann joined #minetest |
| 15:48 |
|
MDude joined #minetest |
| 15:52 |
|
asdew joined #minetest |
| 16:07 |
|
Jhalman joined #minetest |
| 16:16 |
|
I_am_6r1d joined #minetest |
| 16:17 |
|
Hawk777 joined #minetest |
| 16:43 |
|
sagax joined #minetest |
| 16:43 |
|
Copenhagen_Bram joined #minetest |
| 16:59 |
|
Verticen joined #minetest |
| 17:37 |
|
m42uko joined #minetest |
| 17:42 |
|
Talkless joined #minetest |
| 17:56 |
|
mizux joined #minetest |
| 17:56 |
|
Conradis_ joined #minetest |
| 18:00 |
|
Conradi__ joined #minetest |
| 18:11 |
|
Conradish006 joined #minetest |
| 18:14 |
|
Conradish006 joined #minetest |
| 18:18 |
|
Conradish006 joined #minetest |
| 18:22 |
|
proller joined #minetest |
| 18:24 |
|
Conradis_ joined #minetest |
| 18:31 |
|
fluxflux joined #minetest |
| 18:36 |
|
alket joined #minetest |
| 18:41 |
|
Aris joined #minetest |
| 18:56 |
|
I_am_6r1d joined #minetest |
| 19:02 |
|
homthack joined #minetest |
| 19:02 |
|
daiNoZord joined #minetest |
| 19:04 |
tango_ |
does minetest support gas? |
| 19:04 |
tango_ |
like liquids, but spreads out in all directions |
| 19:04 |
big_caballito[m] |
tested, my computer is on fire |
| 19:04 |
sfan5 |
there is no engine support for that |
| 19:05 |
|
I_am_6r1d joined #minetest |
| 19:06 |
big_caballito[m] |
*as in fuel, lol |
| 19:09 |
|
watcher joined #minetest |
| 19:23 |
|
mynick joined #minetest |
| 19:43 |
tango_ |
sfan5: would core be interested in an impl? |
| 19:44 |
* tango_ |
plans on implementing grisou / firedamp |
| 19:44 |
sfan5 |
my personal opinion is "probably not" |
| 19:45 |
sfan5 |
also there is another issue to be solved before that: currently almost all places check for == air, but if other non-air nodes are going to be widespread that would have to be changed to check drawtype == airlike |
| 19:45 |
sfan5 |
or maybe with a group |
| 19:45 |
sfan5 |
(so that you can actually placed nodes / etc into places that aren't air but another gas) |
| 19:48 |
tango_ |
ah good point |
| 19:51 |
|
fluxflux joined #minetest |
| 19:58 |
|
Peppy joined #minetest |
| 19:59 |
calcul0n_ |
the musttest game has something like this if you're interested |
| 20:00 |
calcul0n_ |
gas pockets which can spread when you mine and poison you |
| 20:02 |
|
fluxflux joined #minetest |
| 20:06 |
tango_ |
calcul0n_: I was more interested in having it explode if you place a torch in the area |
| 20:06 |
tango_ |
but this would conflict with sfan5' remark |
| 20:07 |
tango_ |
btw mtg needs better textures, I have troubles telling some ores apart, sometimes even seeing them because I'm colorblind |
| 20:07 |
tango_ |
can nodes be made to sparkle if they are illuminated? |
| 20:13 |
|
majochup joined #minetest |
| 20:13 |
sfan5 |
it wouldn't be impossible for the mod to spawn glowing particles |
| 20:13 |
sfan5 |
but that's not the preferable solution |
| 20:30 |
|
dgsomerton joined #minetest |
| 20:33 |
|
proller joined #minetest |
| 20:38 |
|
perrier joined #minetest |
| 20:38 |
|
Copenhagen_Bram joined #minetest |
| 21:01 |
|
submariner joined #minetest |
| 21:07 |
|
fleeky_ joined #minetest |
| 21:22 |
|
newbie joined #minetest |
| 21:31 |
|
gualse[m] joined #minetest |
| 22:25 |
|
Aris joined #minetest |
| 22:32 |
daiNoZord |
it's pertinent - does anyone play elite:dangerous? |
| 22:42 |
daiNoZord |
I'm only interested in Elite's multi-faceted rank/status structure |
| 23:03 |
daiNoZord |
I think my idea is less complicated than it sounds ( it sounds complicated in my head ) but i guess it's broken down into parts... |
| 23:11 |
tango_ |
huge dungeon and no chest |
| 23:11 |
tango_ |
impossible, right? |
| 23:12 |
daiNoZord |
There is a cheap workaround to the first half of my conundrum and that is to guage a monster as 10 blocks and then Warriors and Workers are the same faction and I can use a mod already in existence... |
| 23:13 |
daiNoZord |
tango - any experience with self-replenishing chests? |
| 23:13 |
daiNoZord |
But that is a tacky solution |
| 23:14 |
tango_ |
daiNoZord: nop |
| 23:15 |
daiNoZord |
fair enough :) |
| 23:18 |
daiNoZord |
2nd part of conundrum - progress halted upon a level being attained, pending a challenge set by a senior (not admin necessarily) then - Level 2! or 3 or 4 or..... |
| 23:22 |
daiNoZord |
I like the idea of seperate factions tho. Players should be able to join/rejoin/leave with their faction with their achievements intact |
| 23:23 |
daiNoZord |
But only if they're allied else the rank/status structure would get confusing - hence "leave" |
| 23:28 |
|
hecks joined #minetest |
