Page 1 of 1

My model worked... but I don't think it should have. (Paths)

Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2014 15:51
by Enjay
Possibly not a bug but perhaps an area for tightening up?

Just out of interest, I loaded up a project into GZDoomBuilder and it flagged up a genuine error with my PK3 but GZDoom had been working with the mod anyway.

When the files were loaded into GZDB, I got an error message saying that one of my models could not be found. On checking the MODELDEF, sure enough, the "Path" statement was missing from the model definition. However, the model had been working in GZDoom (possibly because the previous actor in the MODELDEF had a model in the same folder and the path was correctly entered for that one, so perhaps the path just carried across to the next actor). I put the Path statement in to the MODELDEF and GZDB stopped giving the error message.

I just wondered if this is something that GZDoom should have been flagging up?

Re: My model worked... but I don't think it should have. (Pa

Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2014 17:50
by Graf Zahl
Ouch.

But...

Do you know the shitstorm that might ensue if I CHANGED it???

Re: My model worked... but I don't think it should have. (Pa

Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2014 21:07
by Enjay
Graf Zahl wrote:Do you know the shitstorm that might ensue if I CHANGED it???
Yeah, could be nasty. :?

Perhaps don't change the behaviour (unless it is otherwise undefined/problematic) but allow GZDoom to print a console warning?

Re: My model worked... but I don't think it should have. (Pa

Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 18:11
by NeuralStunner
If my opinion amounts to anything: Fix it anyway. If someone can come up with a compelling case of "mod is doing it wrong and we can't fix the mod instead for whatever reason", then it can probably be "demoted" to a warning. Until then, it's a laughably small thing for anyone to be that upset over.

Maybe it's just me, but where the documentation indicates a path attribute for each model definition, I would consider that the standard that should be followed. But then, I'm more careful than a lot of modders about making sure the behavior I'm getting is expected. :?

Re: My model worked... but I don't think it should have. (Pa

Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 19:06
by Edward-san
Please ensure that the model name indicated in MODELDEF has the same case as the file itself, or else the users with case-sensitive filename (for example linux) would have problems when loading the data (or is it already checked with a case insensitive string comparison?)

Re: My model worked... but I don't think it should have. (Pa

Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 20:11
by Graf Zahl
The entire lump directory is case insensitive.

Re: My model worked... but I don't think it should have. (Paths)

Posted: Wed May 04, 2016 11:28
by Graf Zahl
Changed it.