Pocket Plane Group
Friends and Neighbors => Weimer Republic (WeiDU.org) => WeiDU => Topic started by: DavidW on March 01, 2019, 03:22:52 PM
-
I just noticed that the readme says that COMPILE_BAF_TO_BCS et al are 'deprecated'. Can you relax this to 'do not use without a real reason' or similar? There aren't many cases where you wouldn't use DECOMPILE_AND_PATCH, but there are some - e.g., you have a template BAF file and you want to hot-modify it and install multiple versions (since COMPILE doesn't allow you to have different source and target filenames).
-
Second. FWIW, COMPILE_BAF_TO_BCS remains the simplest way to compile an AI script direct to the /scripts folder.
-
Yes, all that.
But being marked deprecated is a little different thing that "marked for deletion", in the word itself, it's just "not recommended" usually for a reason, of it being part of old coding style.
.. and don't you need to then copy the .bcs file to the scripts folder as a .BS file...
-
No, because COMPILE_BAF_TO_BCS doesn’t impose the .bcs suffix.
-
Suppose I added an OUT option for COMPILE that defaults to current behaviour but allows you to specify target directory and target name: would that satisfy you instead? I'm not keen on this don't use this unless you really think you must thing, because it's nonsense.
-
I think that's fine, given that COMPILE already permits patches.
But is there anything actually technically-problematic about COMPILE_BAF_TO_BCS? Assuming there's nothing technically wrong with it, can you just drop the 'deprecated' and just put a note in the readme saying that 99% of the time DECOMPILE_AND_PATCH is better?
-
There's nothing problematic about them other than their error-prone nature.
But what's the motivation for not recommending against the use of these patches?
-
Wording has been relaxed.