IrrExtensions >> not for V1.3 !!!

Acki · Post by **Acki** » Thu Feb 22, 2007 2:39 am

And another great extension !!!
Protect your DX meshes with a password now !!!

Yes, now you can make a password protected copy of your DX files and load the protected files into Irrlicht !!!

At the moment only DX files are supported, but I will add it to the other file formats, too (if I have a little bit spare time)...

Strong99 · Post by **Strong99** » Thu Feb 22, 2007 11:31 am

Great :

You said overideFont would help, only listboxes has those, i can't find it by chatboxes or filebrowsers.

Acki · Post by **Acki** » Thu Feb 22, 2007 2:10 pm

In fact they all have setOverrideFont because they all using a list box...
But it could be that you can't access the list box and so you can't set the override font...

Now, what's strange is that I can't reproduce the error...

I could when you posted this bug the first time, but now I can't, it's working without problems...

Anyways I made a change to the list box, and now I hope this error doesn't occure anymore (I still have no clue what this error causes)...

If you don't want to download and install the complete IrrExtensions, just for this little change, you can download the single tool file here:
http://abusoft.g0dsoft.com/tool.2.dat
Just copy this file into the folder "tools" and overwrite the old one...

Please report if you then still have this bug !!!

Acki · Post by **Acki** » Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:53 pm

OK, now I completed the password protection for meshes !!!
You can now protect this mesh formats:

DirectX (.x)
Milkshape3D (.ms3d)
My3D (.my3d)
Quake2 (.md2)

Acki · Post by **Acki** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 12:41 am

Hi,
I decided to NOT update IrrExtensions for V1.3 in nearer future (maybe never) !!!

In my opinion V1.3 is a single bug, also 2 files have a wrong timestamp what causes C::B to not compile them !!!

I don't understand why Niko released this version, it seems he even released it without checking what the coders did with it !?!?!

In germany we have a proverb: to many cooks spoil the broth

Such crap was never released before, when Niko did the developing on his own and alone...

hybrid · Post by **hybrid** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 8:18 am

Maybe you need a better development tool? How would a sane tool be confused by timestamps?! Anyway, I just checked the zip file and all files should be old enough to be rebuilt if necessary. So put your own house in order first (to keep up with common sayings

)
So except for your personal inability to compile Irrlicht, what problem do you have with 1.3 (besides the known bugs found in the bug tracker and the Dev-Wiki)?

arras · Post by **arras** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 8:40 am

In germany we have a proverb: to many cooks spoil the broth

I agree, I work with Irrlicht for seweral years and had lot of funn with it despite some bugs. But too many people involving in development directly can spoil whole project in the future. Not that I dont appreciate great work of all that wolunteers who put their efort in to, but Niko should keep greater control of what code gets inside. If he have time for that. Its better to have relatively simple but clean, good structured and 100% working Irrlicht and then some extensions like yours to choose from than have it all in one project which tries to cope with every single wish around but works only half. Just my thought.

BlindSide · Post by **BlindSide** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 12:30 pm

Helloooo, 1.3 was a BUG FIXING release, how can you say it is worse? Most things got tidied up so they are better arranged and more efficient, not much else.

Acki · Post by **Acki** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 1:11 pm

You're right with that timestamp thing, I also don't see why this causes C::B to not compile, but it is fact and not my fault...

Also, if 1.3 is a BUGFIX release, why there are more bugs (or at least many new ones) than before ???

And I don't have any problems with 1.3, because I don't use it, but I see all this bug threads and they are even worse...
And I see that the co-developers couldn't say anything other than that, nobody want to say that his own work was crap...

Of course I could make my IrrExtensions to work with 1.3 (also for the timestamp issue) but I really think 1.3 is crap (also just my opinion), if you want to use 1.3 OK then, but I don't...

EDIT: oh, with the wrong timestamp it was my fault, sorry

all files are compiling now...

Vox · Post by **Vox** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 2:30 pm

I tkink you are jumping with conclusions here. I would give some time to new team until they consolidate.

I'm expecting Irrlicht to grow more quickly now and to become more mature than it is right now.

arras · Post by **arras** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 5:50 pm

More guickly is ofthen not better, I think that Irrlicht is deweloping preaty fast, fasther than other similar projects. I would rather see well tested versions with more important changes go public once per time. Please don't understand me wrong, this is not citique of anybody, I just agree with Acki in that once more people participate directly on development it is critical to maintain some order and strict rules of what gets inside else too many good ideas may screw things wrong way.

Good example is Ogre engine. I dont work with it but as I uderstud there is kind of comiteete of few people who decide what may get inside based on wery strict ruless. They try to keep core project clean and within some borders of original structure. At the end it is similar with C++. You have many libraries which do this and that but few of them become part of standart C++.

And at the end, thanks to all who work on Irrlicht, good luck and keep up good work

eric · Post by **eric** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 9:23 am

I completely agree with Acki and I am glad someone finally brought the subject up. As the old saying goes: too many cooks spoil the stew, i.e. the codes' architecture. I have been using Irrlicht ever since Niko started it and hate to say: Version 1.3 is the buggiest version I've ever encountered. I have wasted many days with this buggy version of Irrlicht, spent countless hours in the forums searching for answers ... I kept asking myself: Is it just me or is this version the buggiest piece of software ever? I have had lockups, crashes and access violation errors and finally decided to stick to version 1.2.

regards, eric

BlindSide · Post by **BlindSide** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 9:25 am

Acki wrote:You're right with that timestamp thing, I also don't see why this causes C::B to not compile, but it is fact and not my fault...

Also, if 1.3 is a BUGFIX release, why there are more bugs (or at least many new ones) than before ???
And I don't have any problems with 1.3, because I don't use it, but I see all this bug threads and they are even worse...
And I see that the co-developers couldn't say anything other than that, nobody want to say that his own work was crap...

Of course I could make my IrrExtensions to work with 1.3 (also for the timestamp issue) but I really think 1.3 is crap (also just my opinion), if you want to use 1.3 OK then, but I don't...

EDIT: oh, with the wrong timestamp it was my fault, sorry
all files are compiling now...

Actually I still havent upgraded to 1.3 yet. (And now that you wont I probably wont either until maybe they use the new mesh formats and niko updates it)

PS: Why doesn't irrlicht have beta or RC versions? I think it would be a good idea and encourage more participation in the testing (For people that cant be stuffed updating to a new SVN every night or dont like to use SVN)

hybrid · Post by **hybrid** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:13 am

SVN is an easy way to get in touch with development versions. It's just not compiled. But what would you want the beta version for if you cannot compile

And getting a binary built each night will be much more expensive in all terms than getting an SVN update.
We get lots of feedback during the development phase, and almost as much when a new release is out. But people just showing up to say "I did not manage to use the new version" are neither helpful nor may expect to get their bugs fixed. If they want the engine to improve they should write bug reports or asked how the new features are to be used. Many people here know how to use the latest SDK or development versions and do help out whenever they can, and last it's often not really a problem of the engine, but of the users who did not really read the docs.
BTW: Which file formats?

Acki · Post by **Acki** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 12:45 pm

BlindSide wrote:Why doesn't irrlicht have beta or RC versions?

right, 1.3 should be in beta state and not a stable release !!!

I'm also sad about the concept change of Irrlicht...

Irrlicht was ever intend to be a clean 3DGraphics-Rendering-Engine !!!
But meanwhile it seems it grows more and more to be a Game-Engine !!!

Adding new features and tools they don't fit the main concept is really bad (my opinion) !!!
Not to make the works bad, for example IrrEdit is a really cool tool, from what I've seen, but I also think that it's not a tool that must be included to the sdk...

And I, for myself, also don't want the complete XML stuff from Irrlicht and all that depands on it !!!