So when this patch is going live O.o?

[egadsrk2]

I come from a mudding background of more than a decade. From both sides of the fence, often at the same time, dev and playing. Of course, its an entirely different thing, but it leads into other questions.

If I wanted to know the status on some new project, I simply would talk to the person heading it up, if it was a team thing. Since everyone involved was just passionate about what they did, they would love any opportunity to keep people informed. If someone wanted to know what the status on my one gigantic area was, I'd delightfully tell them what was up. By the same token, if I found something particuarly abusable, or a bugalug, it'd be faithfully reported. WTB bugged mushroom that debuffed you severely allowing you to consume several buff potions more than intended, then the debuffs wear off and booyah! +300 strength!

I created a large collection-of-areas with its own miniquesting system that provided per-boot rewards, most notably a scroll that was unique once per boot (several days to a week) allowing one concientious questor with several support classes behind her/him to change a 2H weapon to 1H, or vice versa. Used to love stroking my beard and telling people just how close it was to going live.

Now back on topic (Or are we on topic for the first time?). I come from the old boys club, but this is my first MMO, and price largely motivated me. So I'm here for keeps. You people have probably played lots of MMO's, maybe even play a few right now.

Do you get told, even in any detail whatsoever, the status on patches at World of Warcraft, Everquest, or whatnot? The larger the community, the greater density of whiners, kids, and other annoyances clogging up ones forum.

Do these games even have test servers that let you as a mere player be involved in the patching process, be heard, bughunt and get that warm fuzzy feeling of helping your addiction along into perfection?

If the answer to either question is anything but an emphatic yes, quit yer fricken moaning. Oh. Does one have to earn xp on the test live server? Or can one simply choose to be level 216? WTB NT Nano!

[DragonShade]

One has to earn xp. Otherwise, I would test it out myself in a heart beat.

[Eponyx]

Oh. Does one have to earn xp on the test live server? Or can one simply choose to be level 216? WTB NT Nano!

You have to earn xp on the test server however if you report bugs and create good bug reports that ou report in a tool called bugsy you can at level 50 asuming you have enough bugsy points buying boosts. You can even earn the few bugsy points you need to get access to the test server community forum.

Every one should try it out atleast once in my optinion but not when the live servers is down for patching, but try it a week and see if we might be able to win you over.

And to get back on topic... Soon (TM)

[Silirrion]

Looks like we will be good to go this week, probably tomorrow, keep an eye on the launcher for the details later today hopefully

[Nobody]

Looks like we will be good to go this week, probably tomorrow, keep an eye on the launcher for the details later today hopefully

./disco

[GimpedX10]

Looks like we will be good to go this week, probably tomorrow, keep an eye on the launcher for the details later today hopefully

Yikes! ./sarcasm As an MP I shall duck and cover! Zombie pets from grid hell looking for brains. ./sarcasm off

Thanks for the update Sil.

[Kilde]

neat

[Willoisa]

Yay finally! Thx for the infos

*packs camping gear for an all nighter of camping RBSP*

"Yes, this is my temple of Mordeth, find your own temple to camp in!"

[Corers]

I'm not the person to ask for that. a) I am not allowed to do that, and b) I'm working on gamecode and database stuff for it, so there's not a lot to show. Pester the poor Sillirion, he's the one that's officially giving out secrets. Plus there might be some coverage when GC is over.

/me stares at Sillirion

You know you want to give me those screenies...just give in

[Enno]

As Sillirion says, it looks like we're good to go. The only thing I'm personally not happy with is the time it can take to open the skill GUI, but we had a look at that today, and it seems it isn't an easy fix. We managed to speed it up one or two places, but I'm not even sure we're risking to include that - it would stink if an optimization like that messed up the chance of patching tomorrow. So yeah. We'll fix that eventually.

Oh, and for those that like programming stories from hell, what do you think is wrong with this (simplified) code?

  std::map<std::string,std::vector<int> >::const_iterator i = m.begin();
  while (i != m.end()) {
    const std::pair<std::string,std::vector<int> >& elem = *i++;
    const std::string& key = elem.first;
    std::cout << "Found key \"" << key << "\"\n";
  }

[NeoNeXuS3999]

Oh, and for those that like programming stories from hell, what do you think is wrong with this (simplified) code?

  typedef std::map<std::string,std::vector<int> >::const_iterator i = m.begin();
  while (i != m.end()) {
    const std::pair<std::string,std::vector<int> >& elem = *i++;
    const std::string& key = elem.first;
    std::cout << "Found key \"" << key << "\"\n";
  }

hmm... is "elem.first" a function, a variable, or a pass by reference? If you are coding C++ typically you don't try to create public variables in a class they usually are private. It can be easy to miss something like because its such a minor thing thats missing. If "elem" is a structure then ok sure.

I don't know why but having const declarations in a loop just gives me an uneasy feeling for some reason. Then again using templates can do all sorts of funny stuff. :P

I assume that this source compiled?

[leggosboy]

As Sillirion says, it looks like we're good to go. The only thing I'm personally not happy with is the time it can take to open the skill GUI, but we had a look at that today, and it seems it isn't an easy fix. We managed to speed it up one or two places, but I'm not even sure we're risking to include that - it would stink if an optimization like that messed up the chance of patching tomorrow. So yeah. We'll fix that eventually.

Oh, and for those that like programming stories from hell, what do you think is wrong with this (simplified) code?

  typedef std::map<std::string,std::vector<int> >::const_iterator i = m.begin();
  while (i != m.end()) {
    const std::pair<std::string,std::vector<int> >& elem = *i++;
    const std::string& key = elem.first;
    std::cout << "Found key \"" << key << "\"\n";
  }

I'll take "setting values to a constant more than once for 200, Alex".

[Lorddrakus]

  typedef std::map<std::string,std::vector<int> >::const_iterator i = m.begin();
  while (i != m.end()) {
    const std::pair<std::string,std::vector<int> >& elem = *i++;
    const std::string& key = elem.first;
    std::cout << "Found key \"" << key << "\"\n";
  }

Im no C++ expert but the typedef line looks weird. I thought typedef just created an alias for types... in this case i would be an alias for ::map<std::string,std::vector<int> >::const_iterator.

As far as my knowledge goes (which isnt that far i admit ) that line is the same as writing std::map<std::string,std::vector<int> >::const_iterator = m.begin(); which ofcourse wont even compile

Loose the typedef and it should work... asuming 'm' is a valid map

[Enno]

No, it's more subtle than a typedef (how did that get there?). And the compiles without a warning, there's nothing syntactical wrong about it. Nevertheless, it took 6 eyes and an afternoon to find what was wrong... We were starting to doubt C++

The problem I had was: in the first line inside the for-loop, why did the compiler insist on creating a copy of each vector and string in the map, despite the fact that there's just a reference (&) taken? What the heck? Hehe. I'm sure there's someone out there who sees this in like 5 seconds.

[Darkbane]

Been a long time since I did C++ seriously... hmm... not sure how much better compilers are now, but templates used to do really wierd stuff sometimes... I'm not that familliar with the std class lib though... I get the gist, but the devil is in the details in C++, far more so than any other language I know...

[Lorddrakus]

why did the compiler insist on creating a copy of each vector and string in the map

Is that even possible? Isnt the key in a map unique?

[NeoNeXuS3999]

Should the "*i++" be "i++" instead? With the * you are refrencing what the iterator is pointing to.

[NeoNeXuS3999]

the way the loop is structured you want to increment to the next item in the list not increment the value at the present location of the list. I would assume the loop wouldn't terminate if there is no way for the loop to reach the last iterator.

[Lorddrakus]

the way the loop is structured you want to increment to the next item in the list not increment the value at the present location of the list. I would assume the loop wouldn't terminate if there is no way for the loop to reach the last iterator.

I think you would have to write (*i)++ for it to try and change the value that the iterator is pointing at. Also I think the compiler would complain if you tried to increment a 'pair'-object with ++.

You sure you didnt post the fixed version Enno?
I can't see how it can create a copy of the values using that code... it just shouldn't!

[Negs]

hehe its like i'm reading greek, but still fascinated .... O_O