Would be nice to have a test maybe ?

Still missing the XML headers in variants.

You might want to look at Vulkan's warnings as well. I wish he would write inlines but that might be messy.

I wanted to write something to detect which maps where using textures but I don't know how to parse the pmp binary with python to figure out

1. Which texture is used the most
2. How to replace it

Was anybody else able to reproduce ?

Now fixed :)

Might be interesting : https://stackoverflow.com/questions/49475680/c-conventions-regarding-passing-objects-pointer-vs-reference
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/22146094/why-should-i-use-a-pointer-rather-than-the-object-itself

Well given the current state of things around here and the impact it has on me, I guess this won't happen soonish. Maybe I'll get to do it for A24 but I'm not sure anymore. 47th revision (192 comments)

Means rewriting the whole patch, but okay I guess...

In D1718#84092, @Nescio wrote:

Alive and dead is equal to not having them at all.

Isn't that confusing?

In D1718#84090, @Nescio wrote:

Alive + Dead + Notbeinggathered only works when not being gathered.

Why? Surely something can't be alive and dead simultaneously? (No Schrödinger's cat in 0 A.D.)

In D1718#84088, @Nescio wrote:

Thanks, that's helpful.
Alive and Dead are clear for fauna (fatten when living, decay when killed), but not really for gaia templates (is a tree considered alive or dead?).

Well it might change again before it's committed but currently you can do something like

In D1718#84084, @wraitii wrote:

@Stan I haven't really looked deep into your patch, so perhaps, yes. I don't consider what I've said above a review.

@wraitii Anything else you want me to change aside from the warning in Jenkins console ?

Well in tests you could check that Mirages have all the health keys that are functions ?

Test passed on windows :)

Just tested, seems to work as expected on windows (vs2015)

Tested it on windows. Noticed no apparent glitches, nor errors, rotated camera zoomed in and out, and did both at the same time. Parallax look the same.

In D1971#83960, @Freagarach wrote:

• Reverted FaceTowardsTarget change. (In favour of D2014.)
• Allow 0 radius in bombard-area.

I will commit it when I have some time. Likely after fixing the the two concerns raised on my commits, and or maybe the unit fix.

Let's do better than this: D2010.

In D1995#83798, @Freagarach wrote:

Can I submit this myself? If so, would the action "Close Revision" do that?

In rP22346#34394, @elexis wrote:

In rP22346#34393, @Stan wrote:

Shall I make another diff then ?

We can't know that without knowing the answer to the question when the TODO case can be triggered.

It would seem they added support for Microsoft Visual Studio 2019.
As of today, still haven't updated the CHANGES.txt file.

Shall I make another diff then ?

Usually one can write Fixes #5445 to automatically close tickets.
@Itms, we now need a AtlasUI autobuild for windows, not sure that's automatic yet.

Sorry, should have been more specific.

Yeah I was waiting for something like D2009 which I would have done myself if someone hadn't come to the rescue. Will add the keyword soon.

In rP22323#34353, @elexis wrote:

Pass pointers instead of arrays

How are arrays passed?

If you have some time, maybe it would be nice to have a small video on youtube demonstrating the feature. Nothing fancy.

In D1337#83716, @wraitii wrote:

Rebased - needs some cleaning, like the anti-cavalry formation no longer has a walk animation which is annoying - I guess I should group the animations better. The limit of one variant per file is quite annoying because it means one must change a lot of files every time -_-

Still would work with D1901

Well it's up to wraitii to review those, so I guess up to him then.

In rP22295#34278, @elexis wrote:

Reviewed By: Wraitii

Reviewed By is reserved for people other than the author.
Comments By: Itms can be added when people influenced the patch without having accepting it.

In rP22266#34230, @elexis wrote:

No notes.

That these templates shall not appear in the list of placeable templates may be true, but there are also the generic templates that should not appear in that list.
Also that a template shall not appear to be placeable doesn't mean that it is impossible to place it if it would appear in the list.
Hence unplaceable/ would also be imperfect.

Another possibility would be hidden/, but that also is ambiguous. Everything is ambiguous.
Perhaps unplaceable/ and a README.txt defining unplaceable/ as not appearing in the Atlas list of entities would be the solution that satisfies all problems (including the clarification that a template that may technically be placed may be contained in that folder).

@elexis did you get the notes ? :)

Try to fix the build on Linux

The hue is slightly different.

• Whitespace
• Static_cast
• spaces to tabs
• rebase

Commandeering to rebase @Clockwork-Muse feel free to commandeer back if you want to continue working on it.

That sounds good and maybe actually better than being that precise though the shape should differ depending on the type of attacker. However I beleive that the spread parameter is made for that. One could use that to compute the circle.

@wraitii Thoughts on this ?

I think it would be nice to have this.

@wraitii @Freagarach.

Well maybe you guys could try to use my conan patch ? You will need to change the copy to osx instead of win32 and likely edit premake libs.

I'm abandoning this :) It probably can be reopened when we actually remove these references.

Raising concern for a warning reported by @Krinkle. No biggie but the target parameter isn't used anymore.
Why doesn't it set the the class attribute anymore ?

Yeah I don't think that will work ever. I'm not sure where @fabio saw that it could be removed.

Maybe you can fix the last two warning (trailing dots)

The auto fix failed I guess.

In D1993#83328, @Krinkle wrote:

In D1993#83293, @Stan wrote:

Before this get committed you might as well want to fix the warnings that appeared in the Vulkan console.

The only remaining one should be for curly. Due to there being almost 50/50 adherence to that, I wasn't sure whether it is a style we still want to follow consistently or whether it might be something we want to disable and allow developer to choose on case-by-case basis whether curly braces are useful.

In D1993#83291, @Krinkle wrote:

Hoping to see this land relatively soon to avoid merge conflicts, after that I'll move on to the next area to lint :)

In D1950#83214, @Nescio wrote:

Ideally different projectiles would also be able to have different damage, therefore what is eventually desirable is support for multiple ranged attacks, e.g. a fortress able to fire both arrows (long range, low damage) and javelins (shorter range, higher damage).

Most of the time Anything between {} is part of an object. anything between [] is part of an array

Well if you can fix the ai that's nice.