Killzone Kid – User talk

From Bohemia Interactive Community
Revision as of 12:06, 19 August 2014 by SilentSpike (talk | contribs) (Sig)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Not important, but nice to know

Hi. I'm just wondering (and Google didn't help) what "sqf" stands for; do you know? Fred Gandt (talk) 04:03, 23 March 2014 (CET)

[14:44] Karel Mořický: 
SeQuence Script
SeQuence Function

--KK

Thanks KK. My OCD is sated :-) Fred Gandt (talk) 01:28, 25 March 2014 (CET)

Sorry to butt in uninvited. My understanding is SQS = "Status Quo Sequence (or maybe Script?)" (SQS was originally only intended for controlling the camera during cutscenes), SQF = "Status Quo Function", SQM = "Status Quo Mission", SQC = "Status Quo Campaign". "Status Quo" was the original working title for "Operation Flashpoint", and like the game engine, the file types date back that far. I don't have any sources though. Cheers :) --Ceeeb (talk) 04:31, 25 March 2014 (CET)

I'm not sorry you butted in Ceeeb :-) I like information \o/ Legacy stuff can often seem to make little sense after some years have gone by. I have "Pictures of Matchstick Men" as an earworm now! Cheers! Fred Gandt (talk) 04:41, 25 March 2014 (CET)

Ceeeb makes a lot of sense, I'm sorry I haven't been with Arma since OFP but I believe him. I'd call Some Quality [insert a letter] if it was for me :) --KK

The first scripting language I learned was LSL which I came to wish was built better differently, and am now thinking of what those letters could have stood for on a rough day. I think "Lousy Sodding Language" would sum it up quite well, but in all honesty I owe that shoddy mess a great deal, as it introduced me to programming and development.
I can't help but think that Karel probably knows what he's talking about even though "Status Quo *" makes a lot of sense. In the long run, it doesn't really matter, but - it's nice to know :-) Fred Gandt (talk) 17:52, 25 March 2014 (CET)

Request for comment

At Village_Pump_(proposals)#Interlinking_via_.22See_Also.22  -- Fred Gandt (talk/contribs) 15:32, 11 April 2014 (CEST)

BIS_fnc_addDocumentation

Is there a reason beyond "because no one has done it yet" why the BIS_fnc_* funcs are not thoroughly documented here? -- Fred Gandt (talk/contribs) 02:11, 13 April 2014 (CEST)

My guess would be that each BIS_fnc_ contains header comment with function description and is available from debug console in game. --KK
The issue came to light in chat on the Skype group for scripting, regarding a "how to" question, which revealed the lack of documentation.
I'm assuming that since there's a list of available functions and a few have their own page's, that it would be considered an acceptable use of resources to document the rest for ease of access?
If for no other reason, interlinking would prove useful; all the documentation in one place.
Can you see any reason to not go ahead with adding the rest? I can add the task to my list of things to do (expanding rapidly) >.O -- Fred Gandt (talk/contribs) 22:34, 13 April 2014 (CEST)
I am nobody so you don't have to consult with me on what you want to add. --KK
You have made a lot of effort on this Wiki, YouTube, and your own site to help people understand and do more. You're not nobody :-)
I may not have to consult, but I'm new here, and I'd consider it impolite to just storm on in and shake things up. Collaboration requires a little humility.
That said, I have noted that {{Function}} exists and is in use already, so I guess it's there for a reason! I'll get on it as time allowed. Obviously being followed around will be appreciated. My main reason for being here is to learn, and although I'm keen on improving the Wiki, I know little about the Arma platform at this time, so lack a lot of technical knowledge about it.
BTW - I've got a fairly radical idea about how to improve the "See Also" sections around the Wiki, and if it works (demo to follow) it could save a lot of time and mess, but it is quite radical, and would change the way things are done and look.
It's exactly that sort of change I wouldn't feel good about trying to shoehorn in without community support. -- Fred Gandt (talk/contribs) 02:09, 14 April 2014 (CEST)

createUnit

Hiya!

Thanks for setting me straight about the units, you were right about them spawning at [0,0,0]. I still think it might be beneficial to include when the value does default to [0,0,0] in the article? I would happily remove the bit about no units spawning.

Thanks :) ZamboniBambino (talk) 20:25, 7 May 2014 (CEST)

Not sure this is related to the createUnit. position objNull is [0,0,0] and player on the server is objNull.
Perhaps not, but position is related to createUnit in some way. Would it be useful to add it somewhere ? Or would you consider it to be useless? ZamboniBambino (talk) 22:48, 7 May 2014 (CEST)
Not quite sure what you want to say, that position [0,0,0] will spawn unit in rhe water? I thought this was obvious. That position objNull is [0,0,0], then it is not like you *always* pass position as position player to the unit creation. If you really want to add something not quite relevant to createUnit page, it is generally accepted to use talk page https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Talk:createUnit people read that stuff too.
Hmm, I don't think I'm getting anywhere. I only wanted to suggest that if a person passes objNull, the position is [0,0,0]. I didn't say that you would always pass that position, or the player's position to the createUnit function. I think in expectation of it being useless to most, i'll just leave it. ZamboniBambino (talk) 23:07, 7 May 2014 (CEST)
In this case this would be a relevant comment for either position or objNull page, if it does not already exist.

Arma_3_CfgWeapons_Weapons and "srifle_DMR_01_DMS_snds_F"

Hey, saw you had undone my change to Arma_3_CfgWeapons_Weapons. I've just tested the addWeapon command on both "srifle_DMR_01_DMS_snds_F" and "srifle_DMR_01_DMS_pointer_snds_F" and only the second produces a result for me. However the first doesn't throw any script error out.

I also manually used BIS_fnc_exportCfgWeapons with the "weapon" parameter and it still says that the class name is "srifle_DMR_01_DMS_snds_F". Were you testing on the dev branch or did you simply look for a script error? I'm quite puzzled as to where the discrepancy is here. SilentSpike (talk) 02:28, 12 June 2014 (CEST)

I tested on latest dev --KK
I just tested with isClass and it came back false. However I'm on stable, would you mind giving the below code a go? It seems like there could be an issue with BIS_fnc_exportCfgWeapons.
systemChat format ["%1",isClass (configfile >> "CfgWeapons" >> "srifle_DMR_01_DMS_snds_F")];
got true on todays dev build
Thanks! Confused as to why the function gives me a false class name on my build, but I'll just assume it's magic and hope the problem goes away in a future update for now.

I thought you might want to weigh in on my recent question over here since you've substantially contributed to the Description.ext page. --SilentSpike (talk) 13:06, 19 August 2014 (CEST)