- Registered User
Member for 11 years, 6 months, and 7 days
Last active Tue, Sep, 30 2008 14:06:02
- 0 Followers
- 514 Total Posts
- 0 Thanks
May 10, 2007_ForgeUser1198916 posted a message on [Request] AddOn that spawns candybars for normal attacks/auto-shotYou might want to follow this thread: http://www.wowace.com/forums/index.php?topic=6006.0 - although it doesn't yet answer this request, it looks as though it eventually might.Posted in: Addon Ideas
May 10, 2007Posted in: General ChatQuote from Murazorz »How does naming it LibDewdrop makes it easier to understand than Dewdroplib? You wanted to find Dewdrop or am I missing the point? In my point of view, the important thing is the name, not that it's a library.
I think you are missing the point - if you don't already know the names of all the libraries, "Dewdrop" (Or Jostle, or Crayon or ...) means squat. LibDewdrop not only labels it as a Library, but also groups your folders accordingly if you're looking at an alphabetized view. DewdropLib also indicates that Dewdrop is a library (and in that way is equal to LibDewdrop) but doesn't help with sorting or quick recognition. The name is only important if you already know what the name means. Otherwise, it's gibberish. It's gibberish to many people because they don't read about, select, and install the libraries. They come with their chosen AddOns and are extracted by script to the AddOns folder.
In other words - why would I want to find Dewdrop if I didn't know already what it does? How do I know that "Dewdrop" is what I want to find, if I want to find my libraries? It's like trying to figure out what variable names are in a block of code where the programmer has named each after one of his cats. And by that token, I do agree with funkydude that it's a bit late for it now but that doesn't mean that a descriptive name makes more sense than one that isn't. Personally, I know what Dewdrop is, and I know why Niagara is a funny name but only because I've dug around and looked 'em up and not because the names have any meaning.
And it's not my concern, I'm just sayin'. As far as I'm concerned, this is an academic chat about the aesthetics of naming. It's not my development toy and I wouldn't wish the task of refactoring all those library references on my nastiest closet monkey (I think funkydude has made the most important point - what's done is done, and to undo it would be a pain). And for the most part, it works as it is although I'll always think a descriptive naming convention would have been more valuable. But I do really appreciate that some libraries are indicated as such in the AddOns list window, it's a big help and at this juncture I think it's the best that can reasonably be done.
But I'm just eschewing all of that and staying embedded anyway. It gives me a few more seconds for the beer run. ;)
May 10, 2007Thanks for posting. There's more to read for the interested at http://www.kurthanson.com/archive/news/051007/index.shtml. There's a pretty good point by point breakdown of the CRB spin on it. Also, there's a bit on Wired about the issue at (http://blog.wired.com/music/2007/05/jazzmen_to_cong.html) that I think touches upon a key issue - not only is Internet radio an alternative means of listening to music, but it's also an opportunity for artists and genres that don't get exposure to reach an audience.Posted in: General Chat
SoundExchange (the RIAA royalty collection arm) has their own take on the issue, and you can read their .pdfs on their site - http://www.soundexchange.com.
These are interesting and thorny times for music and the recording industry, and if you go further you'll trip over issues such as the democratization of expression, freedom of culture, and marketplace dynamics. Maybe none of that is relevant (just because I think it is doesn't make it so!), but the information is certainly out there for people to decide on their own. You all are just lucky you're not sitting within earshot, cuz I'd gnaw you down to the bone jawing about it.
May 10, 2007Posted in: General AddOnsQuote from Phanx »Pff. A modified-click replacement for drag-and-drop should make the list... drag-and-drop FTL. Now if only EasyDestroy still worked...
There's a working version at http://wow-en.curse-gaming.com/downloads/downloads/26943/ although I found myself happier with GarbageFu to clear out space quickly, and the ol' drag and drop for what little else I destroyed.
May 9, 2007Posted in: Addon IdeasQuote from ggeorgak »
everything needs to be aced! everything!
Oooh, you shouldna oughta said that (cuz it's so very not so) ... Macrotexter may need some fixes or it may lack compatability with some AddOns, but he wrote that he'd be back on the 19th, see what happens then. Myself, I wonder why it takes a macro to do implied targetting (legitimately) and yet the default UI doesn't have it written in. Obviously it can be done, since the macro system supports it and other games have managed the trick. ;)
May 9, 2007Posted in: General ChatQuote from Murazorz »And why does it bother you, do you poke around your addons that much? And if you do, don't you already know what's what?
I leave stuff embedded, because otherwise going into my AddOns folder for maintenance is awful. I have over 200 folders if I dis-embed. I'm a little unclear as to why LibDewdrop (or even DewdropLib) is harder find than Dewdrop, tho. In any case, a lot of the libraries are prefaced with "Ace" (AceHook, AceDB, AcdLocale ...) which seems to me to be a reasonable compromise between "I want my libraries clearly labelled as such" and "I prefer obfuscated naming conventions". If it were decided to label libs appropriately, that's what I would do if it were my decision to make.
But either way, it's no skin off of my nose (and I'm no contributor so I take what I'm given). But dis-embedded has never had enough payoff for me that it's worth the aggravation of making it work.
May 9, 2007I was curious about CooldownCount and tried it once, and it seemed to work well. But I went back to OmniCC because it had always worked for me and I didn't see any gain to using CooldownCount. Tuller (OmniCC) writes good stuff, OmniCC works great, and he's still active with it.Posted in: General AddOns
May 8, 2007Posted in: General AddOnsQuote from fred »So it's Blizz's fault that I lose 3 whole bars! wow...another reason why being a warrior sucks....lol
Well, the upside is that you don't have many things you can do that DON'T require a stance and so you might get much benefit if all those bars behaved individually anyway. In the early days, I only used two bars (one for stance, one for shouts and some buttons were blank), and now I only use 10 buttons. (Paged for stances and again by the ALT key for shouts.) The wife's druid has 40 buttons or so and I don't know how she handles it. I go blind looking at them.
But what you're talking about, I learned from my time with FlexBar, some time ago. I dug this out of the old readme.html, cuz I think it explains the matter fairly well:
WoW buttons are uniquely identified by their ID. Two buttons with the same ID are essentially the same. The default action bar works by changing the ID's associated with it's 12 buttons when you page through it. On page 1 they use ID's 1-12, on page 2 they use 13-24 on up to page 6 which uses 61-72.
For various classes, other ID ranges are used for stance/shape specific stuff. Specifically 73-108 are used by the 3 warrior stances. 73-84 and 97-108 are used by Cat and Bear form for druids and who knows what else.
Finally, 109-120 seem to be completely unused. NO ID'S OVER 120 are allowed - they will crash WoW if they are used!
FlexBar uses ID's 1-72 for action buttons 1-72, ID's 109-120 for action buttons 85-96 and: In the case of Warriors 61-72 for buttons 73-84 -- THAT MEANS THEY DUPLICATE 61-72. THERE IS NO FIX FOR THIS, WARRIORS SIMPLY GET LESS AVAILABLE ID'S. Druids use ID's 85-96 for buttons 73-84. Everyone else uses ID's 97-108 for buttons 73-84.
If you really want to avoid this kind of thing, there are alternatives such as InfiniBar, but they are a little more work to set up.
May 8, 2007Posted in: Addon IdeasQuote from Industrial »...
I like "making a castingbar addon" better then "making a castingbar replacement addon" because the latter will encourage thinking in replacements. Needing an Ace2 replacement of everything for example. If theres no Ace2 addon replacing another addon then it needs to be made.
Ah, well then. There's an element of semantics in it, I can relate to that. Me, my AddOns (Ace or not) replace what I can get from the default UI, or add completely new features. (And where they replace, they also enhance - or what's the point?) My casting bar doesn't give me a second bar beside the Blizzard bar, it replaces it (with a bar free display, I prefer CastProgress). Replacing an AddOn with an Ace'd alternative just to "Ace" it doesn't make sense to me either, but replacing the default stuff with an AddOn does. Or I wouldn't browse here, I'd just use the default stuff. ;)
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.