Reply to Re: A New Version of Dink?
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
I know for a fact Seth looked into this and couldn't do it without breaking compatibility.
I managed to find the place in code where the max number of variables and sprites is set...but I haven't yet looked into the implications of changing those numbers.
@Kyle
Honestly, if I had more experience I might not mind improving the engine like you wish. I wouldn't have a clue where to start with most of those suggestions, although I can always try and see which ones might be possible. But I would like to go all or nothing. In other words, either a small fixup that won't break compatibility at all, or an all out revision of all the limitations in DMOD authoring, possibly/probably breaking compatibility in some cases. But yeah, I don't think I could do the more ambitious approach alone; like I said, even the small fixes are kind of ambitious for me when I don't know much about C++.
For now I'm still trying to figure out getting DirectShow to play mp3s and midi's again, I'll get that first, and then implement some smaller fixes that won't break compatibility, and then decide what to do next.
As for my personal reasons for not using DinkHD, it's because I find downloading DMODs for it less convenient, and the compatibility is not always the same as Dink v1.08. I would probably use it if not for those things.
@shevek
The main reason I'm working on this version of the Dink Engine is because it is the one I've worked with for so long. You may be right in saying the FreeDink engine is better, but I don't know it quite as well, and most people do still seem to use v1.08 or v1.08 Aural+. I've also noticed that people have had trouble playing DMODs sometimes and I haven't wanted to risk not being able to finish one because of discrepancy between the two. I'll tell you what though, I'll take a look at the FreeDink Engine after I've finished making the smaller changes that don't require as much effort to the v1.08 source. I've already spent too much time modifying v1.08 and getting it to compile properly that I feel it would be a waste to not release something now, even if it just a mildly bugfixed version of 1.08 Aural+ with a hopefully less error-prone source release. The amount of effort it took just to compile the source was insane, and at the least I'd like to make a less difficult to compile source, that includes mp3 support like Aural+ and some minor updates.
@Skull
It will change the gameplay minorly, possibly making DMODs a bit easier, but I think the difference will be minor and enjoyable enough to not really be a negative thing.
Edit: Yeah... So much for that. Well, I'll share the source I've successfully compiled to anyone who requests it. I don't think I'll be releasing it as a Dink Network file though...
I managed to find the place in code where the max number of variables and sprites is set...but I haven't yet looked into the implications of changing those numbers.
@Kyle
Honestly, if I had more experience I might not mind improving the engine like you wish. I wouldn't have a clue where to start with most of those suggestions, although I can always try and see which ones might be possible. But I would like to go all or nothing. In other words, either a small fixup that won't break compatibility at all, or an all out revision of all the limitations in DMOD authoring, possibly/probably breaking compatibility in some cases. But yeah, I don't think I could do the more ambitious approach alone; like I said, even the small fixes are kind of ambitious for me when I don't know much about C++.
For now I'm still trying to figure out getting DirectShow to play mp3s and midi's again, I'll get that first, and then implement some smaller fixes that won't break compatibility, and then decide what to do next.
As for my personal reasons for not using DinkHD, it's because I find downloading DMODs for it less convenient, and the compatibility is not always the same as Dink v1.08. I would probably use it if not for those things.
@shevek
The main reason I'm working on this version of the Dink Engine is because it is the one I've worked with for so long. You may be right in saying the FreeDink engine is better, but I don't know it quite as well, and most people do still seem to use v1.08 or v1.08 Aural+. I've also noticed that people have had trouble playing DMODs sometimes and I haven't wanted to risk not being able to finish one because of discrepancy between the two. I'll tell you what though, I'll take a look at the FreeDink Engine after I've finished making the smaller changes that don't require as much effort to the v1.08 source. I've already spent too much time modifying v1.08 and getting it to compile properly that I feel it would be a waste to not release something now, even if it just a mildly bugfixed version of 1.08 Aural+ with a hopefully less error-prone source release. The amount of effort it took just to compile the source was insane, and at the least I'd like to make a less difficult to compile source, that includes mp3 support like Aural+ and some minor updates.
@Skull
It will change the gameplay minorly, possibly making DMODs a bit easier, but I think the difference will be minor and enjoyable enough to not really be a negative thing.
Edit: Yeah... So much for that. Well, I'll share the source I've successfully compiled to anyone who requests it. I don't think I'll be releasing it as a Dink Network file though...
