Back to Home / #openttd / 2011 / 11 / Prev Day | Next Day
#openttd IRC Logs for 2011-11-07

---Logopened Mon Nov 07 00:00:59 2011
00:08-!-supermop_ [] has left #openttd []
00:21-!-supermop_ [] has joined #openttd
00:32-!-nicfer [~nicfer@] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
00:56-!-Eddi|zuHause [] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
00:56-!-Eddi|zuHause [] has joined #openttd
00:57-!-Elukka [] has joined #openttd
01:21-!-JVassie [~James@] has joined #openttd
01:44-!-Qantourisc [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
01:52-!-Prof_Frink [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
02:00-!-andythenorth [] has joined #openttd
02:11-!-Qantourisc [] has joined #openttd
02:23-!-JVassie [~James@] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
02:24-!-andythenorth [] has quit [Quit: andythenorth]
02:30-!-Brianetta [] has joined #openttd
02:38-!-sla_ro|master [slaco@] has joined #openttd
02:52-!-Brianetta [] has quit [Quit: Tschüß]
02:56<Terkhen>good morning
02:57<Terkhen>hmm... that spritegroup nicfer mentioned is from ogfx-rv, and I remember getting that error... maybe he's compiling a broken revision
03:01-!-pugi [] has joined #openttd
03:06<@planetmaker>hello Terkhen
03:06<@planetmaker>from what I read, that error happens if one doesn't read the following two pages of the tutorial which introduce the graphics. But I didn't test
03:10-!-Celestar [~dax@] has joined #openttd
03:14<Terkhen>oh, right, code for the tutorials :)
03:15-!-Celestar_ [~dax@] has joined #openttd
03:16-!-Celestar [~dax@] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
03:16<dihedral>thank you Rubidium
03:16<dihedral>and good morning
03:23-!-Progman [] has joined #openttd
03:24-!-Celestar_ is now known as Celestar
03:28-!-andythenorth [] has joined #openttd
03:28-!-andythenorth [] has left #openttd []
03:32-!-DayDreamer [] has joined #openttd
03:32-!-Neon [] has joined #openttd
03:37-!-Brianetta [] has joined #openttd
03:41-!-andythenorth [] has joined #openttd
03:48*andythenorth just had the worrying thought that MB doesn't understand the cargo system :O
03:49<andythenorth>I've been poking at it for 3 years, on the assurance that it's perfect, and I must be the one who's stupid
03:50<andythenorth>he thinks that classes are OR when it's convenient to him for them to be OR, and AND when it's convenient for them to be AND
03:50<andythenorth>and in any case he wants to use explicit labels anyway
03:51<Celestar>cargo system?
03:53<andythenorth>fibre crops are piece goods and bulk, and may travel by wagons that are refittable to bulk, wagons that refit to piece goods, or wagons that refit to piece goods AND bulk
03:54<andythenorth>but food is express and refrigerated, and may only travel in vehicles that provide both express AND refrigerated
03:56<andythenorth>this latter condition can only be achieved by excluding refrigerated cargo from non-refrigerated express vehicles
03:58<Celestar>uh huh ...
03:58<Celestar>mess, anyone?
03:59<@peter1138>how about don't overcomplicate it :p
03:59<andythenorth>peter1138: I'm trying to under-complicate it
03:59<andythenorth>anyway I'm wrong
04:00<andythenorth>fibre crops are intended to only travel in wagons that provide piece goods AND bulk
04:01<andythenorth>I think the classes are using AND, which is undocumented
04:02<@planetmaker>uhm... piece and bulk?
04:03<andythenorth>planetmaker: according to spec
04:03<andythenorth>planetmaker: assume I have no opinion on any cargo classes until I understand the system
04:03<andythenorth>*specific classes, especially FIRS classes
04:04<andythenorth>I have been treating them as OR
04:04<andythenorth>I know Pikka has treated them as OR, because he told me to
04:04<@planetmaker>the use is unspecified
04:04<@peter1138>it is OR
04:04<andythenorth>see train prop 28/29 docs, the implication is that it's AND
04:05-!-Progman [] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:05<@planetmaker>quite right
04:05<andythenorth>vehicles should be providing an implicit AND by excluding all classes they don't support
04:05<andythenorth>according to the spec
04:06<andythenorth>it's a horrible way to set an AND, but probably the only smart way in an action 0
04:06<@peter1138>don't forget the XOR :D
04:06<@planetmaker>that's irrelevant as it's not a class thing
04:07<andythenorth>the XOR is like lighting a bomb
04:07<andythenorth>it ties classes and labels back together in the most horrible way :P
04:07<andythenorth>it destroys the very practical abstraction that classes could have offered
04:08<andythenorth>it doesn't pay any respect to 'stuff changes' :|
04:08<@planetmaker>it'd be easier to have classes. And labels as unconditional override
04:08<andythenorth>that's what the cb route will do :)
04:09<andythenorth>frosch solved this...2 years ago :P
04:09<andythenorth>me and Pikka agreed with him...then did....nothing
04:10*andythenorth -> work
04:10-!-andythenorth [] has quit [Quit: andythenorth]
04:22-!-pjpe [] has quit [Quit: ajax IRC Client]
04:24-!-TWerkhoven [] has joined #openttd
04:31-!-andythenorth [] has joined #openttd
04:33*andythenorth wonders if 'may' and 'must' should be made explicit as two distinct cargo props
04:34<andythenorth>(or as two return values from a 'what are my classes' cb on cargos)
04:34-!-Progman [] has joined #openttd
04:35<andythenorth>for cases like refrigerated, covered, oversized, requires pressure discharge
04:35<andythenorth>someone's going to invent 'must be shock proofed' at some point
04:36<andythenorth>all of those are 'musts' in addition to the fundamental of whether the cargo is bulk, piece, liquid (and arguably neo-bulk)
04:36<andythenorth>making it a cb would enable witty things, like milk needing refrigeration only after 1900 or whatever
04:36<andythenorth>which is almost certainly a bad idea
04:36<@planetmaker>that sounds what I just wrote, andythenorth :-P
04:36<andythenorth>sorry, was cycling :P
04:36*andythenorth -> logs
04:37<@planetmaker>no, in the FIRS issue
04:37<@planetmaker>for sugar cane
04:38*andythenorth reads
04:38<andythenorth>if we can figure out the right answer, it could be a good time to make a 'big' change to this
04:38<andythenorth>some of the older sets are quite dead anyway wrt FIRS, ECS support
04:38<@planetmaker>basically the conclusion of that is, that cargo classes are both, "and" and "or". Depending on which bits you look at
04:39*andythenorth thinks we should non-violently deprecated the current methods
04:39<andythenorth>basically I want to write 'FIRS will only work reliably with vehicle sets that implement a refitting cb'
04:39<andythenorth>and then decide an interpretation of classes (AND or OR), write it firmly in the wiki and stick to it
04:40<andythenorth>HEQS, FISH, OpenGFX can all be updted
04:40<andythenorth>CETS, UKRS 2, egrvts 2, french set, dutch set, 2cc set are all being actively developed
04:40<andythenorth>US set is being revived
04:40<andythenorth>pikka may take over canset
04:41<andythenorth>DB set will do whatever DB set will do, same for new ships 2
04:41<andythenorth>japan set is being actively developed
04:43<andythenorth>planetmaker: the excluding is a headache no?
04:44<andythenorth>it makes a nonsense of the class system
04:44<andythenorth>if I add 'vehicle must be red' I shouldn't rely on newgrf authors in the past excluding that bit in case I invent it
04:44<@planetmaker>Not necessarily
04:45<@planetmaker>like piece goods and not armoured makes certainly sense
04:45<andythenorth>I wonder if that makes sense only because we're familiar with it
04:45<@planetmaker>But mostly it needs a clarification of how it's supposed to be used
04:46<andythenorth>test case: if armoured didn't exist, and we added it now...
04:47<andythenorth>option a) vehicles exclude that class explicitly because they don't know about it
04:47<andythenorth>option b) vehicles allow that bit explicitly
04:47<andythenorth>option c) vehicles neither allow nor exclude that bit
04:48<andythenorth>which would have been the correct option - for a wagon that allows piece goods
04:50*andythenorth suspects that (c) might be the right answer
04:50<andythenorth>vehicle remains non-committal about classes the author didn't know about
04:51<andythenorth>the sensible cargo author then sets piece goods and armoured
04:51<andythenorth>their cargo gets transported by anything that refits piece goods
04:51<andythenorth>they then ask / hope / beg for more accurate vehicle set support
04:52<andythenorth>this suggests that classes are OR not AND
04:59<andythenorth>if a vehicle grf declared which cargo classes it knew about...
05:01<@planetmaker>as the vehicle NewGRF decides about which it uses, it doesn't need to declare it
05:01<@planetmaker>it just allows cargos or not
05:02<@planetmaker>just allowing by cargo class certainly is the easiest approach. And it already works
05:03<@planetmaker>but a CB which allows things like allow if CC == bulk || (CC == piece,oversized) would solve all these issues of and or or
05:04-!-DayDreamer [] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
05:24<andythenorth>planetmaker: so the cargo just treats all cargo as OR and the vehicle author decides? Works for me
05:25<andythenorth>the proper domain of how to transport things is defined by the vehicles
05:25<andythenorth>in which case we should (continue?) setting cargos as OR
05:26<@planetmaker>well... this has issues, too :-). But might be the best. As a vehicle set author knows best what his vehicle can transport
05:26<andythenorth>what about cases like 'milk should be refrigerated after 1900' ?
05:26<andythenorth>is that a bad case?
05:26-!-DDR_ [~chatzilla@] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
05:28<@planetmaker>adding a callback imho doesn't help the issue with classes and is beside the CC discussion
05:29<@planetmaker>even when that is a new and possibly better method we should use the most sane way of traditional CC without consideration of a CB
05:29<@planetmaker>i.e. let's not consider that, unless I'm given a good reason how it solves the original problem
05:30<@planetmaker>I'm missing a "." behind "method"
05:38-!-andythenorth [] has quit [Quit: andythenorth]
05:38-!-andythenorth [] has joined #openttd
05:50-!-pugi [] has quit [Quit: I reject your reality and substitute my own]
05:51-!-erik [] has joined #openttd
06:02-!-sla_ro|master [slaco@] has quit []
06:07-!-frosch123 [] has joined #openttd
06:13<@planetmaker>hm, cargo classes are a bit. Are they "all apply" or "one or more apply" when set by a cargo?
06:13<@planetmaker>both makes somewhat sense
06:16<andythenorth>planetmaker: :)
06:16<andythenorth>think about it long enough...we'll find the answer :P
06:16<andythenorth>I think I can summarise
06:17<andythenorth>1. if the new proposed cb is used by the vehicle, the final decision rests with the vehicle set author
06:17<andythenorth>2. we need to agree a convention for the 'traditional' method and try to enforce it
06:17<andythenorth>if we ask Pikka, I'm 99% certain he's working to 'one or more apply'
06:18<andythenorth>I am proposing for FIRS that we treat them as per your comments in the ticket, i.e. OR
06:18<andythenorth>if vehicles choose to AND them, there's not much we can do about that
06:19<andythenorth>"This is a bit mask of all cargo classes to which this cargo belongs, out of the following:"
06:19<andythenorth>I read that as 'there are multiple sets which this cargo is a member of"
06:19<andythenorth>rather than "the combination of cargo classes describes precisely one set which the cargo is a member of"
06:19<@planetmaker>andythenorth: the question is "is member of" or "can be member of"
06:20<Eddi|zuHause>it wouldn't make any sense if a cargo is "bulk AND piece goods"... only "bulk OR piece goods"
06:20<@planetmaker>i.e. bulk + piece is mutually exclusive for one detailed representation. Still the cargo could be available as one OR the other
06:20<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: it may not make sense, but that *is* the apparent spec
06:20<@planetmaker>Eddi|zuHause: it does make sense. Just not at the same time
06:21<Celestar>Yexo: what about your fence helper? :)
06:21<@planetmaker>i.e. water could be piece or liquid (water in boxed bottles or in a tanker)
06:21<Eddi|zuHause>planetmaker: hence "OR"
06:21<andythenorth>but the box car should be excluding liquid
06:21<andythenorth>according to the spec
06:21<@Yexo>Celestar: I hid some trouble, wasn't able to fix it soon enough and put it away for a bit. Than yesterday I accidentally deleted part of that code
06:22<andythenorth>so water should not travel by box car. according to the spec
06:22<andythenorth>if the box car doesn't exclude liquid, it becomes refittable for all liquids, which is odd
06:22<Celestar>Yexo: you need your diff back? :P
06:22<@planetmaker>andythenorth: bottled it makes sense :-)
06:22<@Yexo>nah :)
06:22<andythenorth>planetmaker: you make sense. But you're not compliant with the spec :P
06:22<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: no, "not exclude" is not the same as "include"
06:23*andythenorth has logical flaw
06:23<@planetmaker>tri-state logic :-)
06:23<@planetmaker>yes / no / not-defined
06:23<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: a box car would be refittable to cargos that are "piece goods OR liquid"
06:23<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: but not to cargos that are purely "liquid"
06:23<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: but cargos AND
06:23<andythenorth>the spec is quite clear about it
06:24<andythenorth>a cargo isn't piece goods OR liquid, it's piece goods AND liquid
06:24<@planetmaker>Eddi|zuHause: which means that water would need to get cargo class liquid and piece goods. In principle
06:24<andythenorth>so you need a vehicle that supports both
06:24<@planetmaker>which means changing default cargos
06:24<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: logical AND is a "common" OR, while logical OR is a "common" AND
06:24<andythenorth>for a vehicle to support both, it must allow piece goods and liquid. This 'undefined' route doesn't work
06:24<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: it's quite likely that the person who wrote the specs messed that up
06:25<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: this is why my first suggestion this morning is that MB doesn't understand the cargo scheme
06:25<andythenorth>for years we've been told it's us who have the problem
06:25<andythenorth>and that the specs are unambiguous
06:25<andythenorth>and perfect
06:25<andythenorth>the spec is quite clear here about the AND:
06:25<andythenorth>not a bit of doubt
06:26<andythenorth>to transport food (which is express, refrigerated) you need a vehicle that is express AND refrigerated
06:26<andythenorth>and you're non-refrigerated express vehicles must exclude refrigerated
06:27<andythenorth>you're / your /s
06:27<andythenorth>otherwise you fail spec
06:28<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: proof by example?
06:28<andythenorth>last paragraph
06:28<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: an example doesn't make a generic spec.
06:29<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: shall we suggest that I think the spec is either (a) wrong or (b) incomplete or (c) just badly written?
06:29<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: this paragraph allows no conclusion how to interpret "bitmask(CC_BULK, CC_PIECE_GOODS)"
06:29<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: (b)
06:29<andythenorth>b OR c
06:29<andythenorth>b AND c?
06:30<Celestar>b XOR c?
06:30<Eddi|zuHause>my answer is complete.
06:30<andythenorth>b XOR c, and if you know about specific sentences in the spec and put them in a bit mask...
06:31<@peter1138>still on this, heh
06:32-!-TWerkhoven2 [] has joined #openttd
06:32-!-HerzogDeXtEr [] has joined #openttd
06:32-!-Firzen [] has joined #openttd
06:33*andythenorth proposes that classes are OR, and it's up to vehicle owners what they want to do about that
06:33<andythenorth>which will lead to inconsistency within a game between different sets (RVs, ships, trains etc).
06:33<andythenorth>but at least is sane
06:34<@Yexo>classes that are OR lead to very unexpected results
06:34-!-Toshiba [] has joined #openttd
06:34-!-Elu [] has joined #openttd
06:34<@Yexo>for example milk would be CC_LIQUED OR CC_REFRIGERATED
06:35-!-George|2 [~George@] has joined #openttd
06:35-!-APTX_ [] has joined #openttd
06:35-!-yorick_ [] has joined #openttd
06:35<@Yexo>which means you'd be able to transport it in a non-refrigerated tanker but also in a refrigerated trailer
06:36<andythenorth>both are valid
06:36-!-frosch [] has joined #openttd
06:36<@Yexo>milk in non-refrigerated tanker seems a very bad idea
06:36<@Yexo>it also breaks the new class "clean" completely
06:36<@Yexo>how can a cargo be either bulk or clean
06:37<andythenorth>clean might yet be a bad idea
06:37-!-b_jonas_ [] has joined #openttd
06:37-!-__ln___ [] has joined #openttd
06:37-!-SpBot_ [] has joined #openttd
06:37<andythenorth>Yexo: it helps if we forget the current methods and think only about the new cb proposed by frosch
06:37<@Yexo>andythenorth: what about tourist: are they either passengers or express?
06:37<andythenorth>I am quite prepared to say "FIRS doesn't work well with older sets that don't use the cb"
06:37<@peter1138>they are ORed
06:37-!-Netsplit <-> quits: APTX, HerzogDeXtEr2, avdg, frosch123, __ln__, MNIM, Elukka, Borgso, dihedral, TWerkhoven, (+6 more, use /NETSPLIT to show all of them)
06:38<andythenorth>Yexo: tourists? I don't know.
06:38<@Yexo>the spec says: "This is a bit mask of all cargo classes to which this cargo belongs, out of the following: " which to me clearly indicates it's AND, not OR
06:38<andythenorth>I was going to ask you what the spec said :P
06:38<andythenorth>I'm bored of having to try and figure this out :D
06:38<@peter1138>sorry i was on the vehicle properties
06:38<@Yexo>for the vehilce properties it's indeed OR
06:38<@peter1138>the cargo belongs to all
06:39<@planetmaker>so... we always stick to all
06:39<andythenorth>one set, or n sets?
06:39<@peter1138>that doesn't specify AND or OR
06:39<@peter1138>just that it does
06:39<Eddi|zuHause>i think there need to be two sets of cargo classes. "basic" categorization that is ORed (bulk, piece, liquid) and "specific" categorization that is ANDed (refg, express, armored, ...)
06:39-!-Elu is now known as Elukka
06:39<@planetmaker>yes ^
06:39<@peter1138>i think you need to just stop making everything overly complex
06:40<@planetmaker>though the specification would then need be specific to the "base" class
06:40<@planetmaker>At which point we're back to the CB
06:40<andythenorth>I think we're always back to the cb
06:40<@peter1138> if (_gted[engine].cargo_allowed & cs->classes) SetBit(mask, cs->Index());
06:40<@peter1138>do you want that to read
06:40<andythenorth>fwiw, last time discussed, me pikka and frosch seemed to think the cb solved this
06:40<@Yexo>if you force vehicle sets to use the cb you might as well force them to add specific support for firs
06:40<@peter1138>if ((_gted[engine].cargo_allowed & cs->classes) == cs->classes) SetBit(mask, cs->Index());
06:41<@peter1138>that would make all classes required, not just one
06:41-!-SmatZ [] has joined #openttd
06:41-!-mode/#openttd [+o SmatZ] by ChanServ
06:41-!-dihedral [] has joined #openttd
06:41<@Yexo>peter1138: that breaks backwards and ttdpatch compatibility
06:41<@peter1138>and probably break some existing stuff :)
06:41-!-avdg [] has joined #openttd
06:41<@Yexo>so that's not really an option
06:41<frosch>btw. there is one valid point about not adding a cargoclass "clean". it does not influence whether a vehicle can be refitted to it or not; only the costs. So the "clean" could as well be added to some other property. e.g. 15 "freight status"
06:41<Eddi|zuHause>maybe we should completely revamp the system for grfv8?
06:42<frosch>then there would also be room for "need cleaning before loading" and "needs cleaning after unloading"
06:43<@peter1138>Yexo, also making it and would make it useless for new stuff too
06:43<@peter1138>so no win there
06:43<@peter1138>so what's the problem again? lol
06:45<@planetmaker>hm, valid point, frosch
06:45<@planetmaker>though it could be considered that.
06:45<Eddi|zuHause>there are two separate problems: the existing classes cause too many exceptions (e.g. wood, steel, livestock), and trying to resolve these exceptions opened concerns about incompleteness of the specs
06:45<@planetmaker>like food wagons always contain a sign like "don't fill in chemicals" or similar
06:46<Eddi|zuHause>DRG had two kinds of refrigerated wagons, one for general food, and one for fish
06:46<Eddi|zuHause>they exclude each other
06:47<andythenorth>frosch: new property for things that are 'must' rather than 'can'
06:47<andythenorth>e.g. refrigerated, clean, covered etc
06:48<andythenorth>I dislike a new prop for this
06:48<Celestar>to me. "bulk" "liquid" "boxed" etc might be another property than, say, "refigerated"
06:48<andythenorth>me too
06:49<andythenorth>but adding more props might just make it worse not better
06:49<@peter1138>seems to me that the spec caters for "can't be done"
06:49<andythenorth>refrigerated is a bad case
06:49<@peter1138>whereas you want something to cater for "isn't done"
06:49<Celestar>andythenorth: probably ÖP
06:49-!-MNIM [] has joined #openttd
06:50<@peter1138>milk & oil could both go in the same tanker
06:50<@peter1138>(not together)
06:50<andythenorth>at once!
06:50<@peter1138>why would you need "clean"?
06:50<andythenorth>affects refit cost
06:50<Celestar>hopefully not :P
06:50<andythenorth>not refittability
06:51<Celestar>IRL, not even sequentially
06:51<@peter1138>you have to refit to go from oil to milk and vice versa
06:51<Celestar>food tankers may not carry anything else than food.
06:51<andythenorth>clean might be a case better solved another way
06:51<andythenorth>'clean' started out as 'foodstuff'
06:51<@peter1138>Celestar, as i said, catering for "isn't done" rather than "can't be done"
06:52<Celestar>Jet A-1 tankers may not carry anything else than Jet A-1.
06:52<Celestar>not even Jet A
06:52<@peter1138>disallow refit after it's been used :D
06:52<@peter1138>i still think it's being made overly complex
06:53*andythenorth would be a big fan of having it simpler
06:53<Celestar>hey, this is openttd :P
06:53<Celestar>if you want it simple, play Quake :D
06:53<andythenorth>if you want it simple, play Dope Wars
06:53<andythenorth>or puzzle bobble
06:53<Celestar>if (see_mob) shoot(mob);
06:54<Celestar>I'd love to remove refit altogether :D
06:54<andythenorth>refrigerated is a bad case, because refrigerated was not really available until a certain date
06:54<Celestar>but have something like shunting yards :D
06:55<@peter1138>why is it a bad case?
06:55<andythenorth>if food is refrigerated AND express, there won't be any food transport before ~some date
06:55<@peter1138>if it's not available, you just can't transport stuff that needs it
06:56<@peter1138>but it's OR
06:56<Celestar>something like ... Maschen :D
06:56<@peter1138>food is refrigerated or express
06:56<Celestar>no planetmaker :P
06:56<@peter1138>fruit is actually bulk or refrigerated ;D
06:56<andythenorth>or piece goods
06:56<andythenorth>or express
06:56<andythenorth>fruit == 'most cargos'
06:57<@peter1138>i'm talking about the default cargos
06:57<andythenorth>so the prop28/29 stuff on the wiki *is* wrong
06:57<@peter1138>if you're making a food-type cargo, it makes sense to use the default cargo classes for that
06:58<@peter1138>what's wrong about it?
06:58<andythenorth>my logic probably
06:58<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: no, it's just _unspecified_
06:58<@peter1138>"match the classes" is perhaps vague
06:58<@peter1138>it's "match any of the classes" not "match all the classes"
06:59*andythenorth is not clever enough
07:00<andythenorth>english is vague
07:00<andythenorth>but 'does not require refrigeration' seems quite clear to me
07:00<andythenorth>require == AND
07:01<@peter1138>AND NOT, yes
07:01<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: it draws conclusions from some hypothetical "real world" that is not part of the specs, and open to interpretation
07:01<@peter1138>allowed AND NOT disallowed
07:01<@peter1138>allowed/disallowed is a list of cargos, not a list of classes
07:02<@peter1138>s/list/bitmask/g :)
07:02<andythenorth>so for food, in the spec case. with two vehicles
07:03<andythenorth>vehicle A is as per spec - it allows express, but excludes refigerated
07:03<@planetmaker>is over-sized and overweight = neo-bulk?
07:03<andythenorth>vehicle B allows express, and does not include or exclude refrigerated
07:03<andythenorth>planetmaker: maybe, maybe not. Depends on whoever invented it turning it up to clarify
07:04<@peter1138>vehicle A & B are what?
07:04<andythenorth>whatever you like
07:04<andythenorth>it's your set :)
07:04<@peter1138>what's the problem with them?
07:04<andythenorth>(I'm just writing cargos, vehicle authors control what travels where)
07:05<@peter1138>vehicle allows express, but excludes refrigerated. therefore it cannot carry food.
07:05<@peter1138>*vehicle A
07:05<@peter1138>vehicle B allows express, but does not care about refrigerated, therefore it can carry food.
07:05<andythenorth>this is good
07:05<@peter1138>(because food can be moved fast)
07:05<Celestar>just if you guys think you build big stations:
07:05<@peter1138>never mind that it could be stuck on the map for 2 years :p
07:06<andythenorth>so the industry set author should not be trying to enforce AND categories. It's none of their business
07:07<andythenorth>so where's the problem? :P
07:08<@peter1138>that's what i keep saying ;)
07:10<andythenorth>vehicle C: the author wants to only allow cargos that are express AND refrigerated
07:10<andythenorth>exclude all other classes
07:12<@peter1138>what if it's hazardous food ? ;)
07:12<andythenorth>like a giant burger?
07:12<Eddi|zuHause><frosch> btw. there is one valid point about not adding a cargoclass "clean". it does not influence whether a vehicle can be refitted to it or not; only the costs. So the "clean" could as well be added to some other property. e.g. 15 "freight status" <-- then that same should apply to "needs refrigeration" or "needs special protection"
07:12<@peter1138>hazardous, oversized, refrigerated, express
07:13<@peter1138>and passengers
07:13<@peter1138>soylent green is people
07:13<@planetmaker>AND bulk. concurrently
07:13<frosch>Eddi|zuHause: why? either a wagon is refridgerated or not
07:13<frosch>that is refittability
07:14<Eddi|zuHause>frosch: but i _can_ put milk in a normal box van.
07:14<Eddi|zuHause>"milk (cans)"
07:14<Eddi|zuHause>frosch: i just can't move it for several days
07:14<frosch>then milk should be classified as liquid + piece goods + refridgerated
07:15<frosch>Eddi|zuHause: everything in ttd moves for several days :p
07:15<@planetmaker>frosch: and water as liquid + piece
07:15<frosch>anyway, packaged milk and water is rather "goods"
07:15<andythenorth>peter1138: you said 'no' to excluding above
07:15<Eddi|zuHause>frosch: but the current interpretation is that it should be (liquid + piece)*refrigerated
07:15<andythenorth>but what's the correct answer?
07:15<frosch>so milk is no piece goods
07:16<andythenorth>frosch: a wagon is either refrigerated, or not, or doesn't know
07:16<frosch>you can package everything
07:16<andythenorth>piece goods should be the default class :P
07:16<frosch>so, just because something can be packaged, it is no piece goods
07:16<andythenorth>everything can be packaged
07:16<andythenorth>default refit all vehicles to anything that has class piece goods
07:16<@peter1138>andythenorth, it still allows express or refrigerated
07:17<andythenorth>instant forward compatibility for all time
07:17<andythenorth>peter1138: yes
07:17<frosch>the important fact is that you do not package milk when transporting it from the farm to the dairy
07:17<frosch>while the dairy just produces food (packaged piece goods)
07:17<frosch>milk (packaged) is nonsense
07:18<andythenorth>I think anything that is predicated on a discussion of real cargos doesn't help
07:18<andythenorth>if $someone wrote an unambiguous spec some of this would go away
07:19<andythenorth>frosch: what is milk in churns if not packaged (real world examples don't help, there's always a counter-case)
07:20<frosch>that is a pre-historic type of transportation that can be done for anything liquid
07:20<frosch>so just allow boxvans to transport liquid before 1950
07:20<andythenorth>but it's not pre-historic for ottd
07:20<andythenorth>frosch: date based refits using a cb :D
07:20<andythenorth>suddenly all your routes break :)
07:21<frosch>that is actually a valid point about mb's scheme. early wagons can carry basically anything; while wagons introduced later are specialised
07:21<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: the traditional way to do this is offer a new vehicle with fewer refit options, but other advantages (increased load, increased speed, etc.)
07:23<andythenorth>in the case of vehicle C (author wants express AND refrigerated), they can't
07:23<andythenorth>is the answer
07:23<andythenorth>it's invalid
07:24<@planetmaker>that's what you have the possibility to select individual cargos
07:24<andythenorth>sort of
07:25<andythenorth>so the spec is firmly OR?
07:26<andythenorth>when setting cargo classes on cargo prop 16?
07:26<andythenorth>it's a list of sets to which the cargo belongs?
07:28<frosch>cargoclasses of a cargo are OR
07:29<andythenorth>so can I set 'refrigerated' as one of the classes on steel? :)
07:29<andythenorth>that's valid?
07:29<andythenorth>'cold steel'
07:29<andythenorth>I don't mean I propose to do this, I just mean, "it would be valid"
07:30<andythenorth>stupid maybe
07:30<andythenorth>but logically holds up
07:30<frosch>a cargo that is defined as piecegoods or liquid can be transported by either tankers or fladbed wagons
07:31<frosch>it is not the purpose of a vehicle to set the EXCLUDE-mask to the NOT-value of the INCLUDE-mask
07:32<andythenorth>a cargo that is piecegoods or liquid or refrigerated can be transported by tankers, flatbed wagons, or any vehicle with refrigeration
07:32<andythenorth>a cargo that is liquid or refrigerated can be transported by any tankers or any vehicle with refrigeration
07:32<frosch>refridgeration is a class the is more useable for the EXCLUDE-mask, not for the INCLUDE-mask
07:32<andythenorth>more usable maybe
07:33<andythenorth>but to be logically strict about the spec...
07:33<andythenorth>and free ourselves from 10m interpretations...
07:33<frosch>not all classes can be treated the same
07:33<frosch>"express" is espeically broken
07:33<andythenorth>all animals are equal, but some are more equal?
07:34<frosch>yes, horses and cows are equal; especially the cows
07:34<andythenorth>frosch: how do you feel about a new prop?
07:34<andythenorth>for 'additional cargo crap'
07:35*andythenorth thinks it might be logical, but just as much of a mess
07:35<frosch>cargo classes are for refittablity. period.
07:36<@planetmaker>so do we unify oversized and neo-bulk?
07:36<andythenorth>only when we know what the intention was
07:36<@planetmaker>we'll never know
07:37<andythenorth>neo-bulk doesn't necessarily mean heavy or large
07:37<@planetmaker>it means unhandy
07:37<andythenorth>not neatly packaged
07:38<andythenorth>not going to flow nicely
07:38<andythenorth>logs are the epitome of neo bulk
07:40<@peter1138>piece goods ;)
07:40<@peter1138>well, wood is anyway
07:40<@peter1138>both types
07:40-!-blotek [] has joined #openttd
07:40<frosch>i wondered whether that "pouring" thingie is the opposite of "neo-bulk". i.e. whether every "bulk" cargo is either "pouring" or "neo-bulk"
07:41<@peter1138>it's stuff that's "pourable" in ttd-land
07:41<@peter1138>coal, gravel, sand
07:42<@peter1138>grain, wheat, maize
07:42<@peter1138>copper :D
07:42<andythenorth>frosch: every cargo is either bulk (dry, liquid) or break-bulk
07:42<andythenorth>break-bulk = piece goods
07:42<@peter1138>sugar, toffee and cotton candy, yes
07:43<andythenorth>neo-bulk is a sub-class of piece goods, for things that are basically shipped like bulk, but can't be poured
07:43<andythenorth>I would leave bulk alone
07:43<andythenorth>although probably lots of people will fall into the same trap as me
07:43<andythenorth>they will think of 'bulk' as bulky, rather than spending an afternoon reading about the classifications of the international cargo industry
07:44<Eddi|zuHause> <-- proposal (avoiding the word "bulk")
07:44<frosch>well, if every bulk cargo is either pouring or neo-bulk, then one of those classes is too much
07:45<@planetmaker>andythenorth: it really never occured to me that bulk would mean the same as bulky...
07:45<@planetmaker>(yes, it doesn't)
07:45<andythenorth>planetmaker: you are more germanic that mean :P
07:45<andythenorth>you are probably more used to precision
07:45<frosch>neo-bulk = bulk AND (NOT pouring); resp, pouring = bulk AND (NOT neo-bulk)
07:45<andythenorth>and less used to spending half your life socially unpicking ambiguity :P
07:45*andythenorth reads proposal by Eddi|zuHause
07:46<andythenorth>I'd be quite prepared to break all previous classes, and basically go for a v2 of the schema
07:49<@planetmaker>Eddi|zuHause: that's a bit problematic, too: consider water: liquid, piece, clean (when transported in tanker, doesn't matter when palettized)
07:50<Eddi|zuHause>planetmaker: possibly needs further refinement
07:51<@peter1138>pure refined water
07:53<@planetmaker>the longer I think about it, the better it seems to me to treat it as 'and'. And as such a cargo / industry set has to decide whether milk is liquid or piece goods
07:53<@planetmaker>vehicle sets then still can do the other thing, when they explicitly cater for milk
07:53<@peter1138>planetmaker, the default cargos wouldn't work
07:53<andythenorth>milk is liquid
07:53<andythenorth>milk is only piece goods when packed
07:53<andythenorth>packing != cargo
07:53<@planetmaker>peter1138: how not?
07:53<andythenorth>all cargos can be packed into piece goods
07:53<@peter1138>food would be express and refrigerated
07:54<@planetmaker>which is fine
07:54<@peter1138>right, now which sets define that?
07:54<@peter1138>*vehicle sets
07:54<andythenorth>and not transportable in many sets until > 1900 or so
07:55<@planetmaker>the vehicle set decides itself anyway what it does with the cargo classes given for a cargo
07:55<@planetmaker>it's about how it most consistently can be used what we have
07:55*andythenorth gets it
07:56<andythenorth>when setting cargos, there's no code difference between AND or OR
07:56<andythenorth>but we as industry set authors have to *make* a fricking decision
07:56<andythenorth>and so there should be a convention for that
07:56<andythenorth>currently it's all over the place
07:56<andythenorth>but the actual refit is controlled by vehicle set, not industry
07:57<@peter1138>you still have some confusion?
07:57<andythenorth>just waiting for everyone to agree on something
07:57<andythenorth>and change a spec somewhere
07:57<andythenorth>might take a while...
07:58<@peter1138>the spec's fine
07:58<@planetmaker>it's ambigeous
07:58<@peter1138>and changing it breaks anything already out there
07:58<@planetmaker>on how it should be used
07:58<andythenorth>peter1138: by 'spec' you mean wiki, or code?
08:01<@peter1138>ok, i changed the wording to "match any of the classes"
08:01<@peter1138>what's ambiguous now?
08:05<@planetmaker>and what's the reason that and is not applicable?
08:06<@planetmaker>i.e. you just change the specs
08:06<@peter1138>i clarified them
08:06<@planetmaker>previously both arguments were similarily valid
08:06<@peter1138>to state what actually happens
08:06<@planetmaker>'what happens' is what vehicle sets choose to make happen
08:07<@planetmaker>It's not what openttd does
08:07<@peter1138>ok, i dunno what you're talking about now :)
08:09<@planetmaker>errm... don't you think it should be clarified at the *cargo* definition rather? If so?
08:09<@planetmaker>What about the other vehicles?
08:09<@peter1138>i just clarified that bit of the spec, the bit which andythenorth kept pasting around
08:10<andythenorth>he did
08:10<andythenorth>I made a picture of it :)
08:10<andythenorth>from a cargo author's point of view, the classes *must* be treated as 'any of these'
08:10<andythenorth>there is no AND
08:10<frosch>andythenorth: that depends on the class
08:10<andythenorth>wtf? :)
08:10<andythenorth>a class is a class
08:11<frosch>it might be OR for piece and bulk; but it is AND for refridgerated and covered/sheltered
08:11<frosch>as well hazardious
08:11<andythenorth>it can't be
08:11<andythenorth>peter1138 proved to me earlier that you can't AND
08:11<andythenorth>there is no way to do it on a vehicle refit
08:11<@planetmaker>cargo: piece + liquid + refrigerate
08:11<frosch>there is a difference when you look from the vehicle pov, compared to the cargo pov
08:12<andythenorth>are we describing current spec now, or as it should be in an ideal world?
08:12<@planetmaker>vehicle A: refit to piece and not to refrigerate --> don't carry cargo
08:12<@planetmaker>vehicle B: refit to piece --> allow cargo
08:12<frosch>some classes are only meaningful for the INCLUDE-mask, some only for the EXCLUDE-mask, some for both
08:12<@planetmaker>vehicle C: refit to liquid -> allow cargo
08:13<@planetmaker>vehicle D: refit to refrigerate and NOT piece --> disallow?
08:13<@planetmaker>thus piece makes no sense in the disallow
08:13<@planetmaker>nor does liquid or bulk
08:13<andythenorth>that is correct
08:13<andythenorth>simple isn't it :P
08:13<@planetmaker>but observing that: all is fine
08:13<@planetmaker>otherwise: vehicle grf error
08:14<@planetmaker>maybe one could make two further columns for the classes table: use in vehicle allow. use in vehicle disallow
08:14<@planetmaker>as a guide
08:15<andythenorth>could be
08:15<andythenorth>might help
08:15<andythenorth>that's why I wondered about two properties
08:15<@peter1138>can you try explaining it in clear english, cos sometimes these "X A B -> Y" things don't mean anything
08:16<andythenorth>peter1138: it's too easy for cargo authors to make it easy for vehicle authors to do bad things
08:17<andythenorth>if I understood maths, I'd talk about this in terms of sets :P
08:17<andythenorth>but I don't
08:19<andythenorth>planetmaker: are there cases where bulk / piece / liquid should ever be excluded?
08:19<@planetmaker>I don't think so
08:19<@planetmaker>those three should never be excluded it seems
08:20<andythenorth>shuffle the bits around, and reduce the size of the exclude property :P
08:21<frosch>maybe we should extent the cargoclasses to support 1024 of them
08:21<frosch>then every cargo can have its own class
08:22<andythenorth>namespaced :P
08:24*andythenorth excludes cargos in HEQS
08:24<andythenorth>possibly that is a mistake
08:24-!-erik [] has left #openttd [Leaving]
08:24<@peter1138>just do what people wanted for aircraft
08:24<@peter1138>allow everything
08:26<andythenorth>why do I disallow stuff?
08:26<andythenorth>I must be a dumbass :P
08:27<andythenorth>why do mining trucks need to care about piece goods?
08:27<andythenorth>just don't include them :P
08:34<andythenorth>makes no bloody difference if I set exclude to 00
08:34<andythenorth>except now they refit to FICR
08:36<@peter1138>what is FICR?
08:36-!-Oneiric_Soul [] has joined #openttd
08:36<andythenorth>Fibre Crops
08:36<andythenorth>classes are piece + bulk
08:37<andythenorth>so the behaviour is correct
08:37<andythenorth>if it was marked as 'clean' I could exclude it :P
08:37<andythenorth>from mining trucks
08:37<@peter1138>but does piece & bulk make sense?
08:37<andythenorth>I don't know, it's not my decision
08:37<@planetmaker> <-- added hint which classes to not exclude
08:37<andythenorth>MB controls FICR
08:37<andythenorth>not me
08:37<@planetmaker>peter1138: yes, it does
08:38<@planetmaker>wood + wood chips
08:38<andythenorth>planetmaker: I have avoided discussing wood versus wdpr for three days
08:38<andythenorth>now is not the time :)
08:39<@peter1138>but fibre crops *could* be transported in a mining truck
08:39<@peter1138>you just wouldn't do it
08:39<andythenorth>use the label
08:39<supermop_>people could also sit in the back
08:39<andythenorth>the solution is already known
08:39<@peter1138>disallow it via the label, yeah
08:39<andythenorth>I use the label to exclude grain, wheat and maize
08:39<andythenorth>that's what labels are for
08:40<@peter1138>that just means the label needs to be in the lower 32 entries of the translation table
08:40<andythenorth>which is a bit of an arse
08:40<andythenorth>frosch: the cb would be able to access >32 ctt entries?
08:41<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: if you take my proposal, a mining truck would exclude "light" cargos
08:41<@planetmaker>yes. But feasible. ogfx+ uses 21 cargos in explicit refits currently
08:41<@peter1138>andythenorth, yes
08:41<@peter1138>it's only the refit mask that's limited to 3
08:41<andythenorth>so, where's the problem?
08:42<andythenorth>point and laugh at people who use bulk, piece or liquid in exclude
08:42<andythenorth>encourage the use of a cb to overcome CTT limits
08:42<andythenorth>find out wtf oversized is supposed to be
08:42<@peter1138>bulky ;)
08:42<andythenorth>set cargo authors straight about AND / OR
08:42<andythenorth>my work here is done :P
08:43*andythenorth thinks neo-bulk should be a core class like bulk and piece, but....hysterical raisins
08:43<supermop_>needs a better name
08:44<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: i disagree there
08:44<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: neo-bulk is about how to handle the cargo, and thus is a *specialized* property
08:44<Celestar>WTS [clue]
08:45<Celestar>Why is it so difficult for people to understand the causilty principle?
08:46<Celestar>I just spent 90minutes in a friggen meeting to explain to some fsckwit that I cannot change the CAUSE of something when I encounter its EFFECT.
08:46<Celestar>no amount of mandays they give me will enable me to break relativity :P
08:47<@planetmaker>I agree with Eddi|zuHause here. bulk+piece+liquid are 'core' classes. neo-bulk just describes the piece-good. It's also in the transportation stuff I found classified as a sub-category to piece goods
08:47<@peter1138>yeah but got anywhere with tile layers?
08:47<@planetmaker>and pikka also has a point: any cargo should define at least one of the 6 original classes
08:48<Celestar>peter1138: played around with benchmarking/performance a bit more.
08:48<@peter1138>there are 8
08:48-!-Kurimus [] has joined #openttd
08:48<@peter1138>i guess you're exclusing passengers & mail
08:49-!-Progman_ [] has joined #openttd
08:49<Celestar>that's unexclusable ....
08:49<Celestar>er ... excusable
08:49-!-Progman [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
08:49-!-Progman_ is now known as Progman
08:51<Celestar>michi_cc: does your code call GetTileSlope way more often than the original one?
08:52<andythenorth>planetmaker: ok I'm convinced on neo-bulk
08:52<andythenorth>it's a subclass of break-bulk (piece)
08:54<Celestar>michi_cc: I'm loading the same map in trunk, and your repo, run it for 10k ticks. Your code calls GetTileSlope 153426028 times, while trunk calls it 6306034 times.
08:54<Celestar>that's a factor of 25 which I don't understand
08:56<@peter1138>that's quite a lot
08:59<Terkhen>hmmm... lots of long conversations lately
09:00-!-Progman_ [] has joined #openttd
09:01<@Yexo>Celestar: did you check afterload?
09:06-!-Progman [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
09:06-!-Progman_ is now known as Progman
09:08-!-glx [glx@2a01:e35:2f59:c7c0:e10b:2972:428a:9030] has joined #openttd
09:08-!-mode/#openttd [+v glx] by ChanServ
09:08-!-DayDreamer [] has joined #openttd
09:11-!-Neosublimation [] has joined #openttd
09:11-!-Eddi|zuHause2 [] has joined #openttd
09:14-!-SirSquidness [] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:15-!-SirSquidness [] has joined #openttd
09:15-!-Celestar [~dax@] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
09:16-!-supermop_ [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
09:16-!-enr1x [] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:17-!-Eddi|zuHause [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
09:17-!-Firzen [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
09:18<frosch>Terkhen: don't judge conversations by their length; but by their results :p
09:21-!-SirSquidness [] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:21-!-SirSquidness [] has joined #openttd
09:22<andythenorth>MB proposes moving to wagon classes
09:22<andythenorth>which is not a new idea
09:22-!-enr1x [] has joined #openttd
09:22<andythenorth>but he has worked it through
09:23<@planetmaker>for certain definitions of 'worked through'
09:23-!-Adambean [] has joined #openttd
09:24-!-DOUK [] has joined #openttd
09:27<andythenorth>so...we could keep the current scheme
09:27<andythenorth>adopt the scheme from Eddi|zuHause2
09:27<andythenorth>or adopt the scheme from MB
09:27-!-Eddi|zuHause2 is now known as Eddi|zuHause
09:28<andythenorth>or keep the current scheme, but enforce a split between 'core type' and 'requires'
09:28<andythenorth>or do nothing
09:28<Eddi|zuHause>i spot some flaws in MBs scheme...
09:28*planetmaker currently prefers 'do nothing'
09:28<@planetmaker>it was all clarified ;-)
09:28<Eddi|zuHause>e.g. the "L" category, which covers various completely different things
09:28<@planetmaker>it has its limitations. But every scheme has that
09:28-!-mahmoud [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
09:31<Eddi|zuHause>PS: in MBs scheme, mail vans should be "D"
09:34<frosch>afternoon sir belugas :)
09:35<@Belugas>hi hi mister frosch
09:46<andythenorth>what are the problems with 'express' as a concept? Multiple people have reservations about it
09:47<frosch>it's one of those classes which are only suitable for "exclude"-classes
09:48<frosch>so, if your set has two wagons carrying piece goods you can set the express-wagon to carry bulk, and the non-express wagon to carry bulk except express
09:48<frosch>but which set actually has these classes?
09:48<andythenorth>NARS 2
09:48<frosch>another problem is the default cargo "goods"
09:48<frosch>it has only the "express class", so technically you would have to use the class in a INCLUDE-mask unless you handle it explicitly
09:48<andythenorth>goods is express? :o
09:48<frosch>but, INCLUDE makes no sense :p
09:49<frosch>andythenorth: the default goods is some cargo, which is produced at refineries, saw mills and factories
09:49<andythenorth>clearly needs express :P
09:50<frosch>maybe it should have been liquid + piece goods + express
09:50<andythenorth>perhaps yes
09:51<@planetmaker>sounds like 'yes'
09:55<andythenorth>frosch: this could be changed - it's additions not removals?
09:55<frosch>you can only add new defined classes
09:55<frosch>not change old ones
09:56<andythenorth>it's only going to cause lots of horrible exclusion problems :)
09:56<andythenorth>no-one will notice
09:56<@planetmaker>and result in all sets not carrying goods any longer?
09:56<frosch>andythenorth: just leave it as an exception
09:57<andythenorth>tidy mind problem
09:57<frosch>in fact we might need to do that anyway for all existing cargos
09:57<frosch>cargo classes are for unknown cargos after all
09:57<frosch>so, classes of known cargos do not matter actually :p
09:57<andythenorth>goods doesn't practically cause problems
09:57<andythenorth>it's just odd
09:58<@planetmaker>frosch: ehm... don't matter?
09:59<frosch>planetmaker: yes. you can always get away with not changing the classes
09:59<andythenorth>I think he means, 'issues regarding goods can be handled via the label' ?
09:59<@planetmaker>but it might be nicer to have not a xor existing cargo label but two properties like "allow label" and "disallow label"
09:59<@peter1138>new properties
09:59<frosch>the cb is already decided, isn't it?
09:59<@peter1138>instead of a refit mask, a list of cargos from the translation table ;)
10:00<@peter1138>cb makes more sense :)
10:00<andythenorth>frosch: I'm banking on the cb
10:00<frosch>currently the topic is only to reduce "oversized", "neo bulk" and "pourable" to a single class
10:00<Eddi|zuHause> <-- thoughts?
10:00<andythenorth>cb relies on vehicle authors to Do The Right Thing
10:01<@peter1138>always will do
10:01<frosch>and whether to use "clean" as class, or whether to put it in a different property similar to "freight"
10:01<andythenorth>frosch: it smells wrong as a class
10:01<andythenorth>it's a nice hack, but...
10:01<@planetmaker>well... it's a cargo property
10:01<@planetmaker>I still think it's useful to refit a wagon from coal to grain
10:02<andythenorth>is clean an attribute or a requirement?
10:02<andythenorth>it's ambiguous
10:02<andythenorth>does coal need clean?
10:02<andythenorth>if the previous cargo was something like mud
10:02<@planetmaker>coal is dirty
10:03<@planetmaker>mud is dirty
10:03<@planetmaker>dirt + dirt = still dirt
10:03<@planetmaker>grain is clean. fruit are clean. grain and fruit give some kind of food. But it's not clean anymore
10:04<@planetmaker>or tell the grain mill that processing sugar beet is about the same as oat
10:04<andythenorth>it was intended to show 'needs clean vehicle' rather than 'is clean cargo'
10:04<frosch>maybe "clean" is the wrong property
10:04<andythenorth>foodstuffs was less ambiguous initially
10:04<andythenorth>but the scope crept
10:04<frosch>maybe it should be "easily cleanable" vs. "hard cleanable"
10:04<frosch>you also have to clean the vehicle when refitting from oil to chemical
10:05<frosch>though maybe that holds for all liquid stuff
10:05<andythenorth>set a base cost for cleaning the vehicle to the next cargo?
10:05<@planetmaker>that doesn't make sense
10:05<Eddi|zuHause> <frosch> in fact we might need to do that anyway for all existing cargos <-- if the purpose was to reduce the number of exceptions, then we hereby failed
10:05<frosch>or to word it differently: does "clean" mean the cargo needs a clean environment before loaded, or does it mean "it does not make it dirty for the next cargo"?
10:06<@planetmaker>or rather: we have that. It's refit cost
10:06<andythenorth>needs a clean environment (was the intention)
10:06<@planetmaker>frosch: I interpreted it as "needs (somewhat) clean environment"
10:06<frosch>Eddi|zuHause: the goal is to require no execptions for future cargos, not for existing ones
10:06<Eddi|zuHause>frosch: i disagree.
10:06<frosch>planetmaker: so both chemicals and milk need a clean environment
10:07<frosch>so refitting from chemicals to milk is fine?
10:07<Eddi|zuHause>frosch: someone writing a new set, should have to care the least bit about hysterical exceptions
10:07<@planetmaker>:-) Chemicals are dirty :-P
10:07<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: they just need to use labels
10:07<@planetmaker>Though of course that's problematical
10:07<frosch>planetmaker: so refitting from oil to chemicals is fine?
10:07<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause or create a case for cargo scheme v2, clean sheet of paper, break all old set
10:08<@planetmaker>frosch: yes, that's what I implemented
10:08<andythenorth>possibly there are enough new sets being worked on, and enough exciting 1.2 stuff to get away with a v2
10:08<@planetmaker>oil is just a chemical
10:08<andythenorth>or tie this to ottd 2
10:08<@planetmaker>With the distinction: it needs some cleaning. But not a totally thorough
10:08<@planetmaker>(i.e. refit is not free, but feasible in a station)
10:08<@peter1138>water is a chemical
10:08*andythenorth liked the idea of reimplementing the entire 'default' economy in newgrf :P
10:09<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: there should never be an ottd2, unless it's a complete rewrite...
10:09<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: well you're proposing to rewrite cargo schema.. just start there and work outwards
10:09<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: everything that is an incremental edit, will just result in another 1.x
10:11<andythenorth>water is a chemical :o
10:11*andythenorth is not drinking water any more
10:11<andythenorth>it's full of chemicals :o
10:11<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: air is a chemical
10:11<@planetmaker>dihydregenmonoxide is the chemical which kills most people on the world actually
10:12<andythenorth>try this
10:12<andythenorth>'may contain trace elements of mineral compounds'
10:12<andythenorth>now write it on the side of a bottle of spring water as 'contains trace elements of mineral compounds'
10:12<andythenorth>one will stop people drinking water, the other will make you a lot of money
10:12<Eddi|zuHause>"berlusconi expected to resign within the next few hours"
10:13<Eddi|zuHause>"mineral water: may contain traces of minerals"?
10:13-!-Celestar [~dax@] has joined #openttd
10:13<@planetmaker>may contain traces of sodium chloride and fluoride
10:13<Celestar>Yexo: not yet :P
10:14<Eddi|zuHause>Celestar: i thought we discussed that the last time? :p
10:14<frosch>[16:11] * andythenorth is not drinking water any more <- you know what fishes do in water?
10:14<andythenorth>I've heard about that
10:15<Celestar>Eddi|zuHause: discussed what?
10:15<Celestar>Yexo: no, the call tree sais different.
10:15<Eddi|zuHause>Celestar: the effect of the savegame conversion on profiling
10:15<Celestar>Yexo: 150M out of the 153M calls are from GetFoundationSlope
10:16<Celestar>Yexo: which itself, is called 50 times as often ...
10:17<Celestar>Yexo: aha. in trunk, GetFoundationSlope is not called from TileLoop_Clear. In your code, it is. 150M times.
10:18<@Yexo>Celestar: my code?
10:19<Celestar>michi_cc's code.
10:20<@planetmaker>must be the similarity of nick names :-P
10:21<@planetmaker>scnr ;_)
10:22<Eddi|zuHause>the keys are like right next to each other :p
10:22<@peter1138>can clear tiles even have a foundation? o_O
10:23<Celestar>can MP_CLEAR have foundations anyway?
10:23<b_jonas_>probably it can
10:23<Eddi|zuHause>well, if you turn MP_CLEAR into "everything underneath a rail/road tile", then yes
10:24<frosch>yes, if the clear tiles are sloped and have a tunnel directly under them
10:24<b_jonas_>I mean, when you replace rail tracks with monorail with the rail upgrade tool, there must be an in between state when the foundations aren't changed but there's no rail on the square
10:24-!-b_jonas_ is now known as b_jonas
10:24<Celestar>rofl peter1138
10:24<Celestar>not in trunk :P
10:25<b_jonas>frosch: hmm, how does that work?
10:25<frosch>not in trunk :p
10:25<Eddi|zuHause>Celestar: it probably wouldn't make a lot of sense to encode the foundation separately into each stacked MP_RAIL/MP_ROAD tile, only into the basic MP_CLEAR tile
10:26<Eddi|zuHause>(and possibly MP_BRIDGE/MP_TUNNEL)
10:26<Celestar>Eddi|zuHause: that's a performance hit.
10:27<Eddi|zuHause>Celestar: then maybe a new tile class MP_OCCUPIED is necessary?
10:27<@peter1138>and 150M calls of GetFoundationSlope isn't? :D
10:27<Celestar>peter1138: that's what I mean :P
10:27<Eddi|zuHause>Celestar: but then again you scrap the possibility of having cliffs
10:28-!-Biolunar [] has joined #openttd
10:28<andythenorth>should I add this to the cargo props page on the wiki?
10:28<Celestar>Eddi|zuHause: what peter1138 said :P
10:28<Celestar>MP_CLIFF :P
10:29<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: how is that clarifying anything?
10:29<andythenorth>improve it then ;)
10:29<andythenorth>let's assume it's GPL
10:29<Celestar>but assuming that about 95% of the clear tiles do not have foundations, we either make the call to it MUCH cheaper (buffering) or skip it.
10:29<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: what exactly is it supposed to clarify?
10:29<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: you can even have the source, although it's a mac app :P
10:30<Celestar>Eddi|zuHause: and if you store the slope (or all 4 points) directly in the struct, there's no need for it anyway.
10:30<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause when you set a class on a cargo, which set(s) it's going into
10:32<andythenorth>not sure my diagram is mathematically correct :P
10:32<andythenorth>it's a long time since I did venn diagrams
10:36-!-Pulec [] has joined #openttd
10:38<+michi_cc>Celestar: Did I tell you already that it is non-optimized code? :)
10:39-!-TWerkhoven2 [] has quit [Quit: He who can look into the future, has a brighter future to look into]
10:39<Celestar>michi_cc: yeah. I'm helping :P or attempting to :D
10:40<Eddi|zuHause>Celestar: storing the foundation explicitly is probably the most sensible solution
10:40<Celestar>it also gives the highest flexibility.
10:40<Celestar>and the least hassle when attempting to retrieve it :P
10:41<Celestar>michi_cc: I just really like that idea ^^
10:45-!-Zuu [] has joined #openttd
10:51-!-Celestar [~dax@] has quit [Quit: leaving]
10:56-!-TWerkhoven [] has joined #openttd
11:06<@Belugas>Humming birds
11:06<Eddi|zuHause>man that was DECADES ago!
11:12<Elukka>really, really low orbit
11:12<MNIM>wewt, KSP!
11:12<MNIM>also, is that the pole?
11:12<Elukka>that is the moon
11:12<Elukka>yes, there's a moon
11:13<@peter1138>i need to update...
11:13<MNIM>yeah, that game evolves fast, last time I played it it had no moon yet
11:13<Elukka>you need the experimental version
11:13<Elukka>kerbin rotates and orbits the sun now, and there's the Mun
11:13<MNIM>since the game runs in windows, and I haven't booted windows in ~2months...
11:13*andythenorth wants the moon
11:13<andythenorth>on a stick
11:14<Elukka>it's awesome to do a translunar injection burn, hit 50x time compression and watch the planet get smaller
11:14<Elukka>there's a trajectory map now which makes orbital transfers a lot easier
11:15*peter1138 wants...
11:15<@peter1138>celestar & michi_cc to finish ;)
11:15<MNIM>when I last played it you still had to eyeball orbit and compare it to orbital charts, lol
11:15<Elukka>the rocket that took me there
11:16<MNIM>oh, not that big, lol
11:16<MNIM>yeah, this version has rcs already instead of the SAS
11:17<MNIM>sickness avoidance system... except that it caused more motion sickness than it prevented, lol
11:17<@peter1138>shame it's windows only :(
11:17<Elukka>it lifts about 3,5 full fuel tanks to low orbit
11:17<Elukka>well there's a mac version :P
11:17<@peter1138>windows & mac only
11:17<@peter1138>who the hell uses them?
11:17<z-MaTRiX>i have just read windows will not like if you rin it off a fast ssd
11:18<z-MaTRiX>there is too little io access delay
11:18<MNIM>silly me.
11:18<MNIM>I should still get around to putting a vm on this box.
11:19<Eddi|zuHause>is that like hobby-versions of pacman running too fast, because the guy programmed it to run on his 286 and didn't account for increasing CPU speeds?
11:19<MNIM>...that's kinda dumb.
11:19<z-MaTRiX>Eddi|zuHause<< exactly ;)
11:20<MNIM>not that Im better, but still
11:20<z-MaTRiX>and guys blame it on the SSD
11:20<@peter1138>no cite?
11:20<z-MaTRiX>the SSD is bad...
11:20<z-MaTRiX>cite ?
11:20<Eddi|zuHause>even some professional games suffered from this. e.g. north&south
11:20<@peter1138>as in
11:20<@peter1138>maybe you'd understand [citation needed] ?
11:20<Eddi|zuHause>(man i'm seriously getting old)
11:20<z-MaTRiX>well its on an online store as comment and in hungarian language
11:20<z-MaTRiX>but here it is
11:21<z-MaTRiX>OCZ Agility 3 SATA III 2.5" SSD 60GB (AGT3-25SAT3-60G)
11:21<@peter1138>so utter tripe anyway
11:21<z-MaTRiX>blazing speed
11:21<z-MaTRiX>and its getting cheap
11:21<Eddi|zuHause>wtf am i gonna do with a 60GB disk?
11:21<z-MaTRiX>system ?
11:22<z-MaTRiX>its SATA III 525 MB/s read/475MB/s write ;>
11:22<z-MaTRiX>faster than my sd-ram was in 2001
11:23<z-MaTRiX>there is 2TB one too, but it has a price
11:23<z-MaTRiX>its faster, as a PCI-Express x4 card
11:25<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: you give a 60GB disk to someone else that's what you do with it
11:25<andythenorth>wait until the baby pictures kick in, then you start thinking "what is the biggest disk they make, and why don't I have it"?
11:26-!-Pulec [] has quit []
11:26<@peter1138>SDRAM in 2001?
11:26<@peter1138>that would've been about 1GB/s
11:26<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: i have a 2TB, a 1TB, a 500GB and a 400GB disk currently
11:26<@peter1138>unless it was PC-66... urgh :p
11:26<z-MaTRiX>maybe DDR ram...
11:27<@peter1138>that would've been 1.6GB/s
11:27<@peter1138>assuming crappy original
11:27<z-MaTRiX>ok, low end SD-ram is about 290MB/s
11:27<z-MaTRiX>in a memtest
11:28<@peter1138>that's about the speed of EDO
11:29<z-MaTRiX>i didnt have EDO ram
11:29<z-MaTRiX>but i do have some computers with SD-ram
11:30-!-rhaeder1 [] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
11:32<z-MaTRiX>single channel DDR1 400MHz goes at ~1.6GB/s with memtest
11:33-!-rhaeder [] has joined #openttd
11:36<z-MaTRiX>but i dont believe you can get >600MB/s out of an SD-ram
11:38<@peter1138>theoretical speed, yeah
11:44<@Belugas>stomac growls. freaking time change :S
11:45<Rubidium>Belugas: oh, I'm not over it myself yet either :(
11:45<Rubidium>it's *so* annoying to wake up long before your alarm is set to go off
11:46<@peter1138>more time for openttd deving :D
11:47<@Belugas>indeed, Rubidium... indeed
11:47<@Belugas>i worked out late on the basement yesterday ( secretly building my speaker cabinet ;) ) so i slept late. my son jumped on the bed at 4:30. like... GET OUT!!!!
11:51-!-Brianetta [] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
11:55<Eddi|zuHause>Rubidium: but time change was over a week ago :p
11:55<Rubidium>yeah... sad, ain't it?
11:55-!-Oneiric_Soul [] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
11:56-!-Prof_Frink [] has joined #openttd
12:01<Eddi|zuHause>but i must admit, my sleeping pattern also "shifted" since then
12:02<frosch>yup, i get hardly out of bed before 10 am :p
12:08-!-|Jeroen| [] has joined #openttd
12:08<andythenorth>frosch: 10am :P
12:08<andythenorth>clear indicator of a no-child-at-home status
12:08<andythenorth>I bet Belugas has been awake at every 10am for several years
12:08<andythenorth>probably maybe 1200 x10am for Beluga consecutively
12:11-!-TGYoshi [~TGYoshi@] has joined #openttd
12:11<TGYoshi>hi :3
12:12<TGYoshi>just decided to try out openttd again :p
12:13<TGYoshi>Let´s figure out how to make opengfx work
12:13<@planetmaker>use the installer..
12:13<@planetmaker>if it works already: use online content download and select it in the game options
12:14<TGYoshi>Oh, found it :P
12:14<TGYoshi>putting in data/ folder
12:14<TGYoshi>I´m using the ´nightly´ version
12:15<TGYoshi>Except for openmsx :3
12:16<@planetmaker>get that via ingame content download
12:17<TGYoshi>ah :D
12:17<TGYoshi>ty :P
12:18<TGYoshi>You probably know some other must-have new-gfx things ;p
12:18-!-pugi [] has joined #openttd
12:19<@Belugas>i cannot remember last time i've been able to sleep past 7:00h am... my wife is the kind "get up, we have millions of thngs to do" Even before my kid... nf we switched time only this weekend, in order to match our big neighborous...
12:19<@planetmaker>neither is new-gfx. Both are base sets and kinda essentials
12:21<TGYoshi>sure, I mean those add-on things. I remember some quite huge extension to industries etc.
12:22<@planetmaker>it's hard to recommend anything. Tastes vary wildly.
12:23<@planetmaker>Again I'd like to direct you to the online content ;-)
12:23<@planetmaker>Test out a few, best individually and use those which you like - in a new game :-)
12:23<@planetmaker>just when using an industry set, make sure you use vehicle sets, which usually support also newly introduced cargos
12:25<TGYoshi>I´ll first try the original game
12:25<TGYoshi>Anyway, where is the inverse mouse option? XD
12:26<@planetmaker>somewhere in the adv. settings
12:26<TGYoshi>Expectable. Somewhere
12:26<@planetmaker>surely not in the 'economy' branch ;-)
12:28<TGYoshi>Maybe stations
12:29<TGYoshi>Ah found it
12:29<TGYoshi>´Reverse scroll direction
12:29<TGYoshi>quite weird how my mouse sticks tho :P
12:32-!-Zuu [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
12:34-!-sla_ro|master [~slaco@] has joined #openttd
12:35-!-Elu [] has joined #openttd
12:37-!-andythenorth [] has quit [Quit: andythenorth]
12:40-!-hanf [] has joined #openttd
12:41-!-andythenorth [] has joined #openttd
12:42-!-pugi [] has quit [Quit: I reject your reality and substitute my own]
12:42-!-Elukka [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
12:46*andythenorth wonders how well the wagon code system would apply to HEQS
12:47<andythenorth>are mining trucks "ordinary open high- and low-sided wagons" (class E)
12:47<andythenorth>or "special wagons: silo wagons, low-loaders" (class U)
12:48<andythenorth>or "special open high-sided wagons" (class F)
12:48-!-LordAro [] has joined #openttd
12:48<frosch>call the manufacturer and ask
12:48<andythenorth>I have him on the line now
12:48<andythenorth>he's wondering how the class codes apply
12:49-!-Brianetta [] has joined #openttd
12:49<andythenorth>my shipping magnate wants to know too
12:49<andythenorth>probably ships might be safely described by just attaching all classes
12:49<andythenorth>that's fien
12:49<andythenorth>fine /s
12:50<andythenorth>what about planes?
12:50<Prof_Frink>Carpentry tools.
12:50<andythenorth>probably class G "ordinary covered wagons, box cars, vans"
12:51<andythenorth>yes: box cars
12:54-!-DayDreamer [] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
13:08<Elu>"It is necessary to introduce a high speed freight service on the route because the wind turbulence generated by a passing Shinkansen has the ability to derail a freight train which can be avoided if the freight train travels at a similar speed to the Shinkansen."
13:08-!-Elu is now known as Elukka
13:14-!-TheMask96 [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
13:18<appe>that's neat.
13:18<appe>you people know this more then me, but japan really seems to be the government interested in trains. and good trains, too.
13:19-!-TheMask96 [] has joined #openttd
13:21-!-andythenorth [] has quit [Quit: andythenorth]
13:22-!-pjpe [] has joined #openttd
13:39-!-mahmoud [] has joined #openttd
13:42-!-hanf [] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
13:45<CIA-6>OpenTTD: translators * r23128 /trunk/src/lang/vietnamese.txt:
13:45<CIA-6>OpenTTD: -Update from WebTranslator v3.0:
13:45<CIA-6>OpenTTD: vietnamese - 14 changes by nglekhoi
13:45-!-DOUK [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
13:47-!-Zuu [] has joined #openttd
13:53-!-andythenorth [] has joined #openttd
14:06-!-Wolf01 [] has joined #openttd
14:10-!-DOUK [] has joined #openttd
14:12-!-JVassie [~James@] has joined #openttd
14:16-!-mahmoud [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
14:16<andythenorth> planetmaker frosch I'm going to summarise some cargo class thoughts for a forum post...
14:17<andythenorth>1. there could be alternatives (eddi, MB), but the class system + cb is one option
14:17<andythenorth>2. cargo authors need to treat cargo classes as OR
14:18<andythenorth>3. cargo authors should not be concerned about what vehicles carry what, only what the intrinsic properties of the cargo are
14:20<andythenorth>4. setting lots of classes is probably unwise (I can't prove this, but I think it will hold)
14:21<andythenorth>[small interruption, the toddler just weed on the floor]
14:22<@planetmaker>also shit happens ;-)
14:23<andythenorth>5. freight cargos should set at least one of: bulk, piece, liquid; this ensures widespread cargo support
14:24<andythenorth>6. don't use real-life transport examples as a guide to the classes, use the intrinsic properties. Milk can travel in churns, oil can travel in barrels, water can travel in bottles, but all are properly liquid not piece goods. If a vehicle set author wants to allow liquid transport by box van (liquid in containers), it's up to them
14:26<andythenorth>7. vehicle set authors should include at least one of: bulk, piece, liquid; exceptions for special vehicles or label-based support only
14:26<@planetmaker>I don't think a guide is needed there
14:26<andythenorth>8. vehicle set authors should not exclude: bulk, piece, liquid; this is likely to lead to poor support for future cargos
14:26<@planetmaker>(for 7)
14:27<andythenorth>9. labels and explicit support are the solution to awkward cargos (highly specific cases)
14:27-!-utn [~utn@] has joined #openttd
14:27<utn>can't you play against pc users when you got a mac?
14:29<andythenorth>10. vehicle set authors should only exclude the known classes (i.e only set the known class bits). Setting a general exclude may damage the abstraction in future
14:29<Rubidium>utn: there's no such limitation
14:30<andythenorth>I could add some general stuff, like 'final decision on transportation rests with vehicle author'
14:30<utn>okay i will try reinstall it then, thx
14:30-!-utn [~utn@] has quit []
14:30<Rubidium>utn: except that you need to use the same version of OpenTTD, e.g all should use 1.1.3 (regardless of whether it's a Mac OS X, Windows or Linux binary)
14:30<andythenorth>and 'industry authors shouldn't waste time trying to force certain refits on older vehicle sets by dicking around with classes improperly'
14:31<andythenorth>and "it may be appealing to you (seem correct) to exclude refrigerated cargo from *every* non-refrigerated wagon, but that's liable to blow up in someone's face" etc
14:33<appe>i think im getting the hang on track effectivity
14:33<appe>adding a longer turn made my year round profit 20% higher
14:34<appe>i do not want to know how people do this in real life.
14:35<CIA-6>OpenTTD: michi_cc * r23129 /trunk/src/ (55 files in 4 dirs): -Add: [NewGRF] Property for the rail type name.
14:37<andythenorth>planetmaker: if you agree with above, I'd like to review FIRS cargos more carefully + methodically :)
14:37-!-KritiK [] has joined #openttd
14:40-!-|Jeroen| [] has quit [Quit: oO]
14:45<@planetmaker>as said, I'd skip 7
14:50<andythenorth>I can skip 7
14:51<andythenorth>you think it's not true, or so obvious not worth stating?
14:52<frosch>i still do not know whether oversized and neo-bulk is the same :p
14:52<@planetmaker>it works for me well without including piece, bulk, liquid for some wagons
14:52<@planetmaker>frosch: I'm tempted to make it the same
14:52<@planetmaker>I'm not aware of any existing vehicle set which uses oversized
14:53<@planetmaker>nor industry set actually
14:53<frosch>no idea whether george actually set them
14:53<frosch>or whether mb just added them to wiki :p
14:53<@planetmaker>it was added in 2009
14:54<frosch>we might just check the current machinery vector
14:54<frosch>(i think that is the one with vehicles)
14:55<frosch>anyway, what about turning the "clean" into a separate property, which is passed to the refitcost callback?
14:55<frosch>or does anyone want to exclude clean cargos from his vehicles?
14:56<@peter1138>can you make the forum autoreplace mb's broken apostrophes? :p
14:56<frosch>broken apo'strophe's ?
14:57<@peter1138>he uses U+00B4 Acute Accent
14:58<@peter1138>always has done o_O
14:58<frosch>ah, ´ instead of '
14:59<frosch>well, they were the same back in dos times
15:00<@peter1138>not... really
15:00<@peter1138>B4 would've been a line drawing symbol
15:01<frosch>well, but the symbols which would appear when you press the keys
15:01<@peter1138>also, hard to type
15:01<frosch>´ is easier to type than ' on german keyboard
15:01<frosch>the latter requires shift
15:01<@planetmaker>ehm... frosch, not really. Yes, but...
15:01<frosch>except if you use dead-keys, then you need to press ´ twice, resp use space
15:02<frosch>but who uses dead keys? if you can have compose?
15:02*planetmaker didn't consider shift more difficult ;-)
15:03<andythenorth>frosch: wrt clean and oversized - I want to get a general approach written down as per 1-10 above (maybe excluding 7)...
15:04<andythenorth>now that you've raised the problems with express, that kind of bothers me
15:04<@peter1138>it really messes up the text flow :(
15:04<@peter1138>orudge, do it!
15:04<@planetmaker>frosch: I'm still not convinced that clean would be a property...
15:04<andythenorth>me neither
15:05<andythenorth>why is express a class *except* for historical reasons?
15:05<andythenorth>express is a bit like clean
15:05*andythenorth had some more thoughts around this
15:05<andythenorth>classes are for *refitting*
15:06<andythenorth>some of these classes might be more properly hints to *refit cost* and *cargo decay* callbacks
15:06<andythenorth>'express' should really mean 'enhanced decay'
15:06<andythenorth>refrigerated similar
15:06<andythenorth>clean absolutely
15:07<andythenorth>is for refit cost only
15:08<frosch>maybe "express" is the same as "clean" :p
15:08<@planetmaker>hm. maybe
15:09<frosch>tourists are passenger+express btw
15:09<@planetmaker>yes, they are
15:09<andythenorth>tourists trouble me
15:09<@planetmaker>they're cleaner than passengers
15:09<@planetmaker>especially when the tourists are football fans
15:10<@peter1138>passenger or express?
15:10<andythenorth>so tourists can travel by NARS 2 express box van?
15:10<andythenorth>how quaint
15:10<@peter1138>so you can shovel them into express vans...?
15:10<andythenorth>and planes without windows
15:10<@peter1138>so you need to exclude passengers... :p
15:10<andythenorth>the madness recurs :P
15:11<andythenorth>peter1138: no
15:11<andythenorth>you exclude 'tourists' label
15:11<andythenorth>because it's known
15:11<@peter1138>i think excluding the passenger class is more useful in that case
15:12<andythenorth>or you exclude pax, because your vehicle definitely can't carry anything that might be PAX
15:12<andythenorth>and then the unintended consequences that might occur are the fault of the cargo set
15:12<andythenorth>for setting a silly class
15:12<@orudge>peter1138: heh, it does bug me, but the phpBB autoreplace isn't quite intelligent enough to be able to replace characters inside words
15:12<@orudge>at least, I don't think it is
15:12<@orudge>maybe you can do regexps these days
15:12<@orudge>I can't remember
15:12<@peter1138>there's probably a module for it :)
15:12<andythenorth>why set express? Any sane vehicle set author will just exclude tourists from express vehicles
15:13<@orudge>(hence people saying things like "shitty" and it appearing as "s***" with the word filter)
15:13<@orudge>(as oppossed to "s***ty")
15:13<@peter1138>was it waht?
15:14<@peter1138>can't remember
15:16<andythenorth>frosch: unless someone pops up and proves different, I would be happy for oversized/overweight to be merged with neo-bulk, although I don't like the 'oversized/overweight' name, it's inadequate
15:17<@peter1138># funny how love is
15:17<frosch>yes, i would rename it to "oversized/overweight/neo-bulk"
15:17<frosch>anything transported in open wagons or flatbeds
15:17<andythenorth>how about 'inconvenient' :P
15:18<andythenorth>to go alongside express and clean as silly classes
15:18<frosch>non-pouring bulk? :p
15:18<andythenorth>well I think we should merge in hazardous as well
15:18<andythenorth>uranium is inconvenient :P
15:20<andythenorth>hazardous is also a 'hint' property
15:20<andythenorth>it could be used for excludes, but it's not that likely
15:21<andythenorth>if you're doing a vehicle set at TTD scale, you shouldn't be adding 'tanker - non-hazardous', and 'tanker-hazardous'
15:21<andythenorth>it's kind of pointless
15:21<andythenorth>but you might use hazardous to lower the vehicle speed limit
15:21<andythenorth>perhaps exclude from planes is valid for hazardous?
15:22<andythenorth>you might use hazard to enforce using a caboose
15:24<andythenorth>frosch: 'like bulk but doesn't pour'
15:25<MNIM>in the future you could have town object to transporting hazardous through their town area?
15:25-!-mahmoud [] has joined #openttd
15:26<MNIM>oh, and in case of a collision, bad things happen and surrounding tiles are rendered useless for some time?
15:29<frosch>for some time? no. they get replace with MP_VOID for the rest of the game
15:30-!-DOUK [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
15:31<andythenorth>these are good ideas :P
15:32<frosch>i guess you cannot even build tunnels to pass MP_VOID :p
15:32<andythenorth>it would be fun - and also a huge griefing opportunity
15:34<frosch>oh, but aircraft can pass it, so even if a town is enclosed by MP_VOID, you can still reach it
15:35<andythenorth>frosch: where was your list of suggested changes to default cargos?
15:37<frosch>i linked it in the thread
15:37<frosch>it is on ottd wiki
15:37<andythenorth>I was looking in the thread but missed it :|
15:37<frosch>but since noone commented on it, i assume noone took a look at it :p
15:37<andythenorth>I looked
15:38<andythenorth>I just don't know what to do about it yet :)
15:38<frosch>bubbles is the only cargo which is oversized but not neo-bulk
15:40<andythenorth>I'm not convinced even that things like steel are either of those classes
15:40<andythenorth>it could be, but is it helpful?
15:46<@planetmaker>why are bubbles not neo-bulk?
15:46-!-Mucht [] has joined #openttd
15:46<@planetmaker>we should declare steel as liquid and hazardous ;-)
15:47<frosch>steel slabs look quite neo-bulk/overweight to me
15:48<frosch> <- does not pour
15:48<MNIM>it does when it belts :P
15:48<MNIM>hah, that'd be a laugh, transporting molten metal
15:49<Zuu>Possible in a mars scenario
15:49<MNIM>true point
15:49<Zuu>Or a hell climate?
15:49<Zuu>Sounds like Afterlife :-)
15:49<Zuu>If you ever played that game.
15:49<frosch>MNIM: steel is transported via train in liquid state
15:50<frosch>though only a few kilometers
15:50<MNIM>Zuu: don't think so.
15:50<Zuu>MNIM: Its a sim/tycoon-ish game where you build the heven + hell.
15:53-!-Kurimus [] has quit []
15:53<andythenorth>steel is definitely bad if it falls on you
15:53<andythenorth>and I *am* planning to add torpedo cars to HEQS
15:54<andythenorth>torpedo = molten metal, not weapon
15:55<frosch>would make for an interesting income function
15:56<frosch>if the trip take to long you have to buy a new wagon
15:57<andythenorth>frosch set capacity to 0 if last trip took too long?
15:57<frosch>yeah :)
16:00-!-LordAro [] has quit [Quit: "Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so."]
16:00<andythenorth>frosch: wrt oversized / neo-bulk, let's plan to merge them in 7 days(?) if nobody objects?
16:00<andythenorth>and lets argue away the 'oversized / overweight' aspect as not-very-important
16:01<Zuu>Recently, I was thinking about a NewGRF which lowers the train speeds and increase loading time in the winter. :-)
16:01<andythenorth>Zuu: you'd need hemisphere parameter
16:02-!-pjpe [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
16:03<Zuu>Or put it in a national train set? Though it would be interesting if you could run an australian trainset along with eg. UKRS both with this "feature" :-)
16:04<Zuu>Those 500 ton wagons are nice :-)
16:04<Zuu>Except when they derail
16:05-!-pjpe [] has joined #openttd
16:05<Zuu>One had a derail here in Sweden which I took quite some time to move away. :-)
16:05<MNIM>I can imagine
16:10-!-TWerkhoven[l] [] has joined #openttd
16:11<Rubidium>just use the z-level and snow line?
16:11<Rubidium>or just the snow line in general
16:17<andythenorth>can a train check snow line?
16:17<frosch>not officially with more heightlevels
16:18-!-pugi [] has joined #openttd
16:18<frosch>but you can compare variable 9E with var 20 to draw snow on your ship :p
16:19<andythenorth>ice on ships is bad
16:19<andythenorth>they sink
16:19<andythenorth>I can do a sinking ship without NewDisasters
16:21-!-Hyronymus [] has joined #openttd
16:22-!-Mucht [] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
16:35-!-DDR_ [~chatzilla@] has joined #openttd
16:35<Eddi|zuHause><andythenorth> or "special open high-sided wagons" (class F) <-- mining trucks are most likely that. F are self-discharging hopper wagons.
16:36<andythenorth>mining trucks definitely self-discharge
16:41<Rubidium>so do box cars with gasses ;)
16:42<andythenorth>babies self-discharge
16:42<@planetmaker>they're neo-bulk, though
16:43*andythenorth ponders writing actual code to test if 'clean' is a stupid idea
16:45<Rubidium>shouldn't liquid containers always be cleaned?
16:48<@planetmaker>there's a different between clean and clean when you refit between oil and diesel and milk
16:49-!-Elukka [] has quit []
16:49<@planetmaker>same as there's a difference between clean hands before eating and before doing a liver transplant
16:50<andythenorth>planetmaker: are you for or against? :)
16:50<Rubidium>planetmaker: imo diesel and oil are the same in terms of cargo in the TTD realm
16:50<@planetmaker>I'm unsure. I like the idea, but of course it doesn't describe in any way a provision necessary
16:51<@planetmaker>as such it's a bit odd class
16:51<andythenorth>I think it's odd
16:51<@planetmaker>Rubidium: oil and fuel oil then ;-)
16:51<andythenorth>so is the livery refit class :P
16:52<andythenorth>not a cargo
16:52<andythenorth>and 'regearing' is not pikka's finest moment
16:52<Rubidium>planetmaker: that, maybe, goes one way (fuel oil -> oil). The other way around needs cleaning due to the crap in oil
16:53<@planetmaker>Rubidium: yes. But the amount of cleaning is WAY different to when you would want to put in milk after a delivery of crude oil
16:53<@planetmaker>(i.e. in reallife it wouldn't be allowed)
16:54<andythenorth>all liquids would demand cleaning
16:54<andythenorth>maybe there's a way to solve it by convention, not class
16:54-!-valhallasw [] has joined #openttd
16:54<andythenorth>again, it might have to be left to the vehicle set author
16:54<Eddi|zuHause><andythenorth> hazardous is also a 'hint' property <-- "hazardous" should be the opposite of "clean", i.e. add it to "oil", "fuel" and "chemicals"
16:55<@planetmaker>Eddi|zuHause: andythenorth, but then it should go into the same property as clean then
16:55<@planetmaker>or as express possibly
16:55<Rubidium>Eddi|zuHause: fluid oxygen is hazardous as well, but might not need as much cleaning
16:55<andythenorth>isn't it boring when a vehicle set goes something like A, B (bigger, faster than A), C (bigger, faster than B), D (bigger, faster than C)
16:55<@planetmaker>fluid oxygen... much "nicer" than oil ;-)
16:56<andythenorth>is it easier just to do the inverse of everything oberhumer suggests?
16:56<andythenorth>easier / better /s
16:57<andythenorth>I wondered if it was a general rule in life: !(oberhumer suggestions)
16:57<andythenorth>in this case, it's about trams
16:58<Eddi|zuHause><andythenorth> and I *am* planning to add torpedo cars to HEQS <-- what UIC class are those? U? Z?
17:00<andythenorth>but they will refit to anything 'clean'
17:00<andythenorth>cargo might get vapourised, but won't get dirty
17:02*andythenorth ponders some actual FIRS cargo classes
17:03<andythenorth>planetmaker: no rush, but do you want to see if you can see any FIRS classes that look wrong - in light of the AND/OR thinking etc.
17:03<andythenorth>and also the 'liquids can go in containers but that doesn't make them piece goods' type thinking
17:03-!-Wolf01 [] has quit [Quit: Once again the world is quick to bury me.]
17:04<@planetmaker>I shall have a look
17:07<@peter1138>anyone heard of maverick sabre?
17:08-!-Adambean [] has quit [Quit: Gone fishing]
17:09<andythenorth>planetmaker: BEER is probably wrong
17:09<andythenorth>sets piece goods
17:09<@planetmaker>well. maybe. Though I've never seen a beer tanker ;-)
17:09<@planetmaker>would be good for 1st May though
17:10<Eddi|zuHause>BEER should very well be piece goods
17:10*andythenorth thinks this would be a good test
17:10<andythenorth>what is specifically piece goods about beer?
17:10<andythenorth>when I drink it, it's liquid...
17:11<Eddi|zuHause>beer is delivered in crates
17:11<@planetmaker>or barrels
17:11<andythenorth>delivered yes
17:11<Eddi|zuHause>or occasionally barrels
17:11<andythenorth>that conflates cargo with container
17:11<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: this is ONLY about the delivery
17:11<andythenorth>no no ;)
17:11<andythenorth>this is only about the properties of the cargo
17:11<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: everything other the (common) delivery method is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT
17:11-!-frosch [] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:11<andythenorth>cargo set author doesn't control vehicles
17:12<Eddi|zuHause>yes, the property of the cargo is that it is commonly packaged in bottles/barrels
17:12<andythenorth>no :)
17:13<andythenorth>well yes
17:13<andythenorth>I don't mean you're wrong
17:13<Eddi|zuHause>see :)
17:13<andythenorth>I just mean it's not helpful
17:13<Eddi|zuHause>it is
17:13<andythenorth>basing cargo classes on examples of packaging or real world vehicles isn't helpful
17:13<Eddi|zuHause>it must be
17:13<andythenorth>every single cargo is piece goods
17:14<andythenorth>I can create a case for any cargo you name that it is piece goods
17:14<Eddi|zuHause>not "a case", but "a common case"
17:15<andythenorth>based on...
17:15<Eddi|zuHause>(other than "fits into an ISO container")
17:15-!-supermop_ [] has joined #openttd
17:15<andythenorth>google image search?
17:15<andythenorth>planetmaker: just for you:
17:16<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: do a nitpick reply in the thread if you like
17:16<andythenorth>I'll find the link
17:17<andythenorth>having a "yes!" "no!" argument here is not a good use of your time or mine
17:17<Eddi|zuHause>i have that one open already :)
17:17<andythenorth>also we have a new contribution
17:17<andythenorth>and proof of the AND problem
17:18<Eddi|zuHause>not understanding that fully, but it roughly seems to coincide with my proposal
17:18<andythenorth>the upside of my solution is that it keeps the existing class structure entirely
17:19<andythenorth>the downside is that nobody seems to agree wtf that is
17:19<andythenorth>the upside of your solution is that it makes sense
17:19<andythenorth>the downside is it's entirely new
17:19<Eddi|zuHause>deprecate the existing system with GRFv8?
17:20<Eddi|zuHause>replace it with a new one?
17:20<andythenorth>I'm way out of my depth about how to do that
17:22<andythenorth>I'm trying to figure out the newest suggestion
17:22<andythenorth>doesn't cement travel in his grain car?
17:23<andythenorth>and coal travels in his fish wagon
17:23<@peter1138># somehow i have to make this final breakthrough... now
17:24<andythenorth>or he has to have a wagon for 'covered AND bulk AND refrigerated'
17:24<andythenorth>and another wagon for 'bulk AND food AND covered'
17:25<andythenorth>which is going to make ships interesting at minimum :P
17:25<andythenorth>and planes
17:25<andythenorth>if it has to be exact-match AND, then I'm going to need to invent a lot stupid ship names for FISH
17:26<supermop_> thought the idea behind fish was all ships able to carry any cargo
17:26<andythenorth>and the buy menu length will be (number ship models) * (number of class combinations)
17:26<andythenorth>supermop_: that wouldn't be possible with exact-match AND on cargo classes
17:26<andythenorth>you could only refit if all the classes matched perfectly
17:26<andythenorth>so you'd need a vehicle type for every combination of cargo classes in the game
17:27<andythenorth>@calc !11
17:27<@DorpsGek>andythenorth: Error: invalid syntax (<string>, line 1)
17:27<andythenorth>@calc 11!
17:27<@DorpsGek>andythenorth: Error: unexpected EOF while parsing (<string>, line 1)
17:27<@planetmaker>@calc factorial(11)
17:27<@DorpsGek>planetmaker: Error: 'factorial' is not a defined function.
17:27<@planetmaker>@calc factor(11)
17:27<@DorpsGek>planetmaker: Error: 'factor' is not a defined function.
17:27<andythenorth>is it factorial, or nCr ?
17:28<supermop_>none of you own a calculator anymore?
17:28<andythenorth>if factorial, 39916800 vehicles are needed apparently
17:28<Eddi|zuHause>@calc 1/sqrt(5)*(((1+sqrt(5))/2)**11-((1-sqrt(5))/2)**11)
17:28<@DorpsGek>Eddi|zuHause: 89
17:28<Eddi|zuHause>that can't be right
17:28<@planetmaker>supermop_: but in the other room ;-)
17:29*andythenorth has an Apple calculator :P
17:29<andythenorth>stupid thing also has the internet and a hard drive
17:29<andythenorth>what's the point in those?
17:29<supermop_>i want one of the rereleased hp 15Cs
17:30<andythenorth>anyway, 39916800 seems to be a lot of vehicles
17:30-!-TWerkhoven[l] [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
17:30<valhallasw>+1 supermop_
17:30*valhallasw still works on an HP 41CV
17:31<andythenorth>maybe with the callback it would be ok actually
17:32<andythenorth>so if it must be AND strict-matched
17:32<andythenorth>I need how many varact checks?
17:32<andythenorth>< 39916800
17:33<andythenorth>but I'm writing the cb, so I can ignore all the AND stuff anyway
17:33<andythenorth>and just do what I like
17:33<andythenorth>I can return 'allow' if it's 1910 and disallow if the snowline is > 7
17:33-!-TGYoshi [~TGYoshi@] has quit [Quit: Poof]
17:34<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: do you propose moving the 'extra' classes to a new prop?
17:34<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: implementation detail...
17:35<andythenorth>well yes...
17:35<andythenorth>but we could achieve your proposal by convention (keep existing system, argue with people who do it wrong), or by new code
17:36-!-Hyronymus [] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:36<andythenorth>milk is clearly piece goods if I accept your beer argument
17:37<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: the difference, like frosch123 pointed out, is that you transport milk from the farm to the dairy, while you transport beer from the brewery to the customers
17:38<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: if you transported milk from the dairy to the customers, then the same as beer would apply
17:38<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: but you transport food from the dairy to the customer, which already is piece goods
17:38<andythenorth>you can file it under edge case, but I think you make more problems with the beer argument than you solve :P
17:38<andythenorth>change it to *beer bottles* and you win
17:39<andythenorth>how is beer dimensioned in FIRS?
17:39<supermop_>bottles and kegs could arguable be different cargoes anyway
17:39<Eddi|zuHause>don't know
17:39-!-Neosublimation [] has quit [Quit: Python is way too complicated... I prefer doing it quickly in C.]
17:40<andythenorth>litres of alcohol
17:40<supermop_>litre bottles?
17:40<andythenorth>dimension it in crates and I'd accept your case
17:40<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: 1 crate == 12 litres :)
17:40<supermop_>how about cases
17:41<supermop_>a hand truck would hold one keg or 6 cases
17:41<supermop_>soo that doesnt really help
17:42<Terkhen>good night
17:42<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: i think you make this more of a problem than it is
17:42<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: there really is no problem wrt newgrf development if a cargo is both "piece goods" and "liquid", as long as people stick to the "no exclude" rule
17:43<supermop_>andy you've inspired me to grab a brooklyn winter ale from the fridge
17:43<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: maybe
17:43<andythenorth>it's unclear though
17:44<andythenorth>now you (as cargo set author) want to control how cargo is transported in detail?
17:44-!-HerzogDeXtEr1 [] has joined #openttd
17:44<andythenorth>I accept it does no harm
17:46<andythenorth>cargo waiting: 99 bottles of beer
17:46<andythenorth>time for bed :)
17:46-!-andythenorth [] has quit [Quit: andythenorth]
17:49-!-valhalla1w [~valhallas@] has joined #openttd
17:49-!-HerzogDeXtEr [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
17:54-!-valhalla2w [~valhallas@] has joined #openttd
17:56-!-valhallasw [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
17:57-!-valhalla1w [~valhallas@] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
17:58-!-TWerkhoven [] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
18:07<+michi_cc>Eddi|zuHause: Do you think it would make sense to change YAIM to show "123 €/month (456)"?
18:07<Eddi|zuHause>imho just leave out the 456 completely
18:08<+michi_cc>The window is showing the count though if you disable maintenance cost, something some people might find useful.
18:09<Eddi|zuHause>or add a details button listing "tracks" "crossings" "signals" "stations" "tunnels" etc. for each railtype
18:10<Eddi|zuHause>so you can have: "tracks: 123", "crossings: 35 (x2)", "tunnels: 12 (x4)", ... "sum: 456"
18:10<+michi_cc>Oh, crossings are much more evil :p For overlapping track bits, its count²
18:11<Eddi|zuHause>details... :)
18:12-!-z-MaTRiX [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
18:12<+michi_cc>So a detail window in a detail window? I refuse to write an expandable tree or something like that.
18:14<Eddi|zuHause>so it's "switches: 34 (x4, x9)"?
18:15-!-DabuYu [DabuYu@] has joined #openttd
18:16<Eddi|zuHause>maybe "switches: 15 (x4)", "crossings: 25 (x9..x36)"?
18:17<Eddi|zuHause>and [?]-click on a tile could show that tile's maintenance cost
18:18<Eddi|zuHause>(maybe i should actually test the patch...)
18:20<@peter1138>why does it need to be so detailed?
18:21<Eddi|zuHause>peter1138: so people notice which sections are really evil maintenance-wise
18:22<@peter1138>i'm still trying to add a scrollbar to the finances window
18:22<@peter1138>so that no extra window is needed for the breakdown of costs, maybe ;)
18:23<Eddi|zuHause>peter1138: what's the problem with that?
18:23<Eddi|zuHause>with the new widget trees, that should be a really simple task
18:29-!-pugi [] has quit [Quit: I reject your reality and substitute my own]
18:31<Zuu>I have always missed a window with a sumary over how much infrastructure each company have. The company window have vehicle counts but if you want eg. station counts you need to open also the station list of all companies.
18:32-!-KritiK [] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
18:40-!-Zuu [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
18:43-!-valhalla2w [~valhallas@] has quit [Quit: leaving]
18:55-!-JVassie [~James@] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
18:56-!-sla_ro|master [~slaco@] has quit []
18:58<+michi_cc>Eddi|zuHause: The finance window is not much more than a single widget in which everything is hand-drawn.
18:59<Eddi|zuHause>michi_cc: so just offset and crop the drawing depending on scrollbar position
19:00-!-Biolunar [] has quit [Quit: All your IRC are belong to us!]
19:00<Eddi|zuHause>or split it into separate widgets (e.g. one for each year)
19:01<Eddi|zuHause>(or a grid, one for each value. then you get both horizontal and vertical resizing "for free")
19:03-!-Progman [] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
19:36-!-Brianetta [] has quit [Quit: Tschüß]
19:45-!-z-MaTRiX [] has joined #openttd
19:48-!-mahmoud [] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
20:52-!-blotek_ [] has joined #openttd
20:59-!-blotek [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
21:12-!-George [~George@] has joined #openttd
21:19-!-George|2 [~George@] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
22:25-!-rhaeder1 [] has joined #openttd
22:31-!-rhaeder [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
23:04-!-glx [glx@2a01:e35:2f59:c7c0:e10b:2972:428a:9030] has quit [Quit: bye]
23:22-!-blotek_ [] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:46-!-supermop_ [] has quit [Quit: supermop_]
---Logclosed Tue Nov 08 00:01:01 2011