yeah, it's dirty, but that's actually what i failed to do. all the inventory display related tables are currently local to each file. i need to have them referenced from a single globally accessible set, but for now copying is fine.
That's what a checkbox outline is for :) tho that's not part of the DefaultUI :(
actually, it seems they changed this when they changed the checkmarks to dots in 4.0.1. if your item is checkable and not checked, it has a ghosted check mark.
if the other addon is error riddled, you could spoof it by creating an "empty" addon that simply loads the sv file only and doesn't contain any real code.
i use the the checkbox subgroup combination in GoblinVendorFilter to toggle all of the subgroup filters on/off works very well for this and keeps it as the "same" function of course you do not want it doing something totally different
yeah, i use the same for gnomeworks. toggle a filter on/off and specify the filtering method in the submenu.
also makes visual sense for selecting groups/subgroups (of recipes, for example) rather than having an "all" selection that's at the same level as its children.
yeah, in your saved vars folder. attach it here or make a ticket in the gw project page and attach it there. is it still doing it? does it do it on all toons? what professions do you have?
interesting. i added that message because the inventory scan really should not take anywhere near that long. something is amiss. can you send me your saved vars file?
i'm confused. why index this by guildName at all? you should only ever have one guild for a toon, right?
i would also only describe what is exposed to the user.
the bankData field in the callback is presumably a table of the data. that's really the only thing the lib user needs to know about in terms of data format.
bankData.numTabs = number of pages in the guild bank
bankData.guildFunds = cash in guild bank
bankData[page].links = table of item links indexed by slot number
bankData[page].stacks = table of item stack sizes indexed by slot number
not sure i'd mention the lastScan and hasData fields.
i'm guessing the unit field in the callback is who sent the message? guildName seems superfluous since you already know your guild name.
Good point, and updated. I suppose a better idea would be just send lib.guildBank[guildName] rather than lib.guildBank.
For that matter, is there a difference between lib.guildBank[guildName] and lib.guildBank.guildName?
yes, there's a difference.
lib.guildBank["guildName"] is equivalent to lib.guildBank.guildName (note the quotes). if guildName is a variable, then you can't use it in dot notation.
yes it was the function to extract the name which had a problem -_-... I use string.len and there are 2 excess spaces...
so I have to format name from getbattlefieldscore() to have only the name, and then use string.match (because I can't remove the 2 excess spaces I don't know how)
thank you
if the spaces are always in the same place, you can just do a string.sub() to cut out the piece you want. of course, fixing your pattern match would be better.
i'm no string pattern genius, but i'm thinking this would work:
local toonName = string.match(message,"picked up by (.+)%.")
if not that, then maybe:
local toonName = string.match(message,"picked up by (%P+)")
how are you extracting the name from the battleground message?
i take it, you've inserted a print command to verify they are the same. i would add a string.length() for each as well just to ensure that there's not some escape code funny business going on.
also, while it's not an issue here, if you're just testing two strings and you don't need the result, string.find() is a better function to use over string.match(). string.match() potentially creates a new string rather than just identifying where the first can be found in the second.
The previous example was to whisper everyone online regardless if they were running the lib or not. Announcing that you have changes would interest only those running the lib to request the changes.
Wouldn't that have the same issue has my example except with a much shorter message?
Keep in mind we can't broadcast the slot item/count over guild comm because people without rank could see it.
eh, i would just leave it to the client to ignore the stuff you're not supposed to see. i mean, it's not like the data is really secure. if somebody writes a mod that ignores rank, you're not going to be able to stop them. whispering changes to multiple people seems burdensome, tho i suppose if you're at the gb you're not really in a time-critical situation.
something to consider with all of this is the possibility that somebody logs into an alt, runs to the gb, deposits a few stacks of something, then logs out immediately. the longer it takes to dispatch this information, the more likely you'll have problems.
i would think a single broadcast ensures that everybody is on the same page. logging out or dc'ing in the middle of a series of whispers would be bad.
0
0
12.3k instead of 12,345
of course. i guess localization is still an issue,
0
0
0
actually, it seems they changed this when they changed the checkmarks to dots in 4.0.1. if your item is checkable and not checked, it has a ghosted check mark.
0
0
yeah, i use the same for gnomeworks. toggle a filter on/off and specify the filtering method in the submenu.
also makes visual sense for selecting groups/subgroups (of recipes, for example) rather than having an "all" selection that's at the same level as its children.
0
yeah, in your saved vars folder. attach it here or make a ticket in the gw project page and attach it there. is it still doing it? does it do it on all toons? what professions do you have?
0
0
i would also only describe what is exposed to the user.
the bankData field in the callback is presumably a table of the data. that's really the only thing the lib user needs to know about in terms of data format.
not sure i'd mention the lastScan and hasData fields.
i'm guessing the unit field in the callback is who sent the message? guildName seems superfluous since you already know your guild name.
0
yes, there's a difference.
lib.guildBank["guildName"] is equivalent to lib.guildBank.guildName (note the quotes). if guildName is a variable, then you can't use it in dot notation.
0
0
if the spaces are always in the same place, you can just do a string.sub() to cut out the piece you want. of course, fixing your pattern match would be better.
i'm no string pattern genius, but i'm thinking this would work:
local toonName = string.match(message,"picked up by (.+)%.")
if not that, then maybe:
local toonName = string.match(message,"picked up by (%P+)")
0
i take it, you've inserted a print command to verify they are the same. i would add a string.length() for each as well just to ensure that there's not some escape code funny business going on.
also, while it's not an issue here, if you're just testing two strings and you don't need the result, string.find() is a better function to use over string.match(). string.match() potentially creates a new string rather than just identifying where the first can be found in the second.
0
eh, i would just leave it to the client to ignore the stuff you're not supposed to see. i mean, it's not like the data is really secure. if somebody writes a mod that ignores rank, you're not going to be able to stop them. whispering changes to multiple people seems burdensome, tho i suppose if you're at the gb you're not really in a time-critical situation.
something to consider with all of this is the possibility that somebody logs into an alt, runs to the gb, deposits a few stacks of something, then logs out immediately. the longer it takes to dispatch this information, the more likely you'll have problems.
i would think a single broadcast ensures that everybody is on the same page. logging out or dc'ing in the middle of a series of whispers would be bad.