More Awesome Than You!

TS2: Burnination => Oops! You Broke It! => Topic started by: Liss on 2006 December 17, 22:36:46



Title: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: Liss on 2006 December 17, 22:36:46
I have a jump bug with some sims when they try to call - sim.  They can use phones for other things, such as call - targets and call - services, taxis, friends, etc.  It's just sim to sim calls.  Can you make sense out of this log?


Title: Re: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: J. M. Pescado on 2006 December 18, 01:20:49
What game version is this?


Title: Re: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: Liss on 2006 December 18, 04:17:57
omgPetZ!!!


Title: Re: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: J. M. Pescado on 2006 December 18, 04:59:02
And you've updated your Phone Hack? If so, I blame the work of the non-Awesome.


Title: Re: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: Liss on 2006 December 18, 11:05:02
I just downloaded the newest DC a couple of days ago due to the fact that the carpool wasn't coming for my pets.  I took all hacks out except yours and jeff's.  I did find an old version of inge's prison stuff and took that out. 

I've also noticed that my pets can't get in cars or taxis to go to community lots since this phone thing started.  This is weird. :p

They CAN get in their carpools now, though.


Title: Re: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: J. M. Pescado on 2006 December 18, 11:46:36
You seem to have done a dumb Liss-type thing. Also, your error log doesn't match Phone Hack code at all.


Title: Re: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: Liss on 2006 December 18, 19:01:52
it's there, I swear :p


Title: Re: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: miros on 2006 December 18, 20:31:10
Did you try the SimWardrobe hack conflict checker?


Title: Re: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: Liss on 2006 December 19, 01:01:40
I tried all the hack scanner stuff.  I finally narrowed it down to another damn hitchhiker.  one of those 68395hl3j;gfklewtJ;UTPOERQUT ones.  All fixed.  I have no idea what it actually was, but it's fixed now.


Title: Re: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: miros on 2006 December 19, 06:34:21
You mean one of the hex-filenames that the Maxis installer makes?  I wonder whatever possessed the Maxis employees to not use the filenames from the sims2pack files.  Third dumbest thing they ever did.


Title: Re: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: J. M. Pescado on 2006 December 19, 08:04:26
You mean one of the hex-filenames that the Maxis installer makes?  I wonder whatever possessed the Maxis employees to not use the filenames from the sims2pack files.  Third dumbest thing they ever did.
The reason Maxis does this is because people often arbitrarily rename those files. Thus, some kind of systematic naming convention was needed so that the retrieving computer did not end up with two of the same thing.

However, people tend to arbitrarily rename those files, and different versions of the same file produce different checksums and therefore different Maxis-names, and so you're back to square one.


Title: Re: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: Marhis on 2006 December 19, 12:27:55
I find extremely useful to put all the Downloads content in subfolders; if you didn't sort them, put all your stuff in a subfolder anyway. In this way, when the installer put the crap in Downloads folder you can immediately spot them, 'cause they are the only files not subfoldered. Put them in another subfolder labeled "crap" or whatever, and you're ready for another installation.
Usually, I found out also that that crap is 99% deletable without even notice their loss.

On Macintosh you may also label all the files with colors (useful if you don't have NL, and you can't subfolder bodyshop stuff), so all the newly installed stuff is uncolored and easy to spot and sort.


Title: Re: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: dizzy on 2006 December 19, 12:52:49
Over the past few years, I've noticed the .NET ninjas out there seem to have some weird hashing fetish. I don't see why they couldn't have just added the needed ID data into a meta resource.  Maybe it makes too much sense. :P

Hashing really only makes sense if you're building a large dictionary data structure internally. If the user can see it, you're obviously not using it right.


Title: Re: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: miros on 2006 December 19, 16:36:11
Over the past few years, I've noticed the .NET ninjas out there seem to have some weird hashing fetish. <snip>

Yet another reason to despise .NET/C#.


Title: Re: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: Liss on 2006 December 19, 18:38:30
it's a good thing I use subfolders, makes it a lot easier to track these things down. 


Title: Re: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: Theo on 2006 December 22, 19:23:27
Over the past few years, I've noticed the .NET ninjas out there seem to have some weird hashing fetish. I don't see why they couldn't have just added the needed ID data into a meta resource.  Maybe it makes too much sense. :P

Hashing really only makes sense if you're building a large dictionary data structure internally. If the user can see it, you're obviously not using it right.

Do you need some 972346? (http://thedailywtf.com/forums/thread/107330.aspx) :D


Title: Re: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: J. M. Pescado on 2006 December 22, 20:25:32
Heh, I write code like that all the time. Only many, many times worse.


Title: Re: little jump bug - log attached
Post by: dizzy on 2006 December 22, 20:59:45
If you don't collaborate or expect to debug your code a year or two later, it's no problem. I once had to port code like that. Not fun. Probably would have taken 10% the amount of time just to write it from scratch.