Breeding Season: Alpha Version 5.3 [Update 11/3/14]

[Ironvein]

Then there is probably a unique factor that I do not know about. I was just listing the steps I preformed prior to the bug. I haven't attempted to recreate it yet, so who knows.

All I can say is, that the inventory cloning bug isn't exactly new. A previous version had an clone issue, but it was thought to be fixed. We'll have to search the forum to see if the old clone trigger still works or not.

[Ironvein]

Looked back into the forum a bit and the original cloning bug triggered (by most accounts) after selling to the GOLD client a few times. It caused the monsters in your inventory to clone themselves and actually caused the game to crash. I don't think it'll crash here since a restock clears the inventory out and replaces it with new stock.

So I guess the test is to check the store inventory after you sell each GOLD client and see if it replicates or not. It was a gold client that I sold to when the bug activated, but it's not something I've checked over time as of yet. If so, it's probably a similar bug as last time.

[Ironvein]

Have not recreated the bug in full, but I am noticing something off.

Try this:

1) Open Store Window
2) Open Client Window
3) Sell a Monster
4) Close Client Window (notice the monster list has not changed in the store window.)
5) Close and Reopen Store Window; new list of monsters.

Kinda buggy there I think, I probably did something similar and triggered the clone bug.

[Ironvein]

Aha, recreated the bug. Change Step 5 of the previous process.

5) Buy a monster (from the visually old list); List changes to new list but cloned bug included.

I think the easiest way to fix this is just to comment out or remove the code that changes the store stock after you sell a monster, it is unnecessary given the way the stock naturally changes over time, coupled with the restock button.

[Campfire]

Started a new game today. My pride and joy :



I got through about 4 months paying back the debt, but i gave up when it got to over 100k gil. Next step; max out breeding modifiers and stats, and obtain every trait. Its been about 6 months and I still come back to this game every so often. My computer was out of action for a few months so I haven't been able to make any music for the game recently, but here is some of the loops i made for the game a while back. You guys are free to use these for any other projects if you want, all I ask is to give credit somewhere where it's due. Keep working hard, Hartista! We're here to help

[WonderGamer]

Aha, recreated the bug. Change Step 5 of the previous process.

5) Buy a monster (from the visually old list); List changes to new list but cloned bug included.

I guess that would make sense. The problem is that data is updating, but the visual display is not (this happened a few versions ago when you were on the breeding screen & you gave birth to a new monster; I think that bug is back after he changed the breeding interface, BTW). If you access data that is no longer valid, it causes an abnormality.

I think the easiest way to fix this is just to comment out or remove the code that changes the store stock after you sell a monster, it is unnecessary given the way the stock naturally changes over time, coupled with the restock button.

I honestly can't say I'm surprised that's your best solution, given you don't like the restocking after selling a monster. I think the easiest solution would be to just force an UI refresh after the data changed; he did it with the breeding screen before he changed the interface, why not here.

[Ironvein]

I think the easiest way to fix this is just to comment out or remove the code that changes the store stock after you sell a monster, it is unnecessary given the way the stock naturally changes over time, coupled with the restock button.

I honestly can't say I'm surprised that's your best solution, given you don't like the restocking after selling a monster. I think the easiest solution would be to just force an UI refresh after the data changed; he did it with the breeding screen before he changed the interface, why not here.

Now who's be judgemental? I don't like the store refresh with client sell because it is an unnatural relationship within the metadata. The relationship within the game is: Store provides the 'pieces' that you need to make the 'products' the clients wants. The store and client relationship goes through the player. Adding extra relationships, just complicates code down the line. It isn't a big deal at this point as it really should be a single line of code added or removed depending on which direction HBomb takes it, but it's bad coding practice to do so. The UI refresh SHOULD have already fixed this, but it seems he only applied it to pens, causing this unexpected but similar error to manifest. HBomb needs to consider his metadata more thoroughly before he gets the code too complicated to fix.

[DashBoard]

Aha, recreated the bug. Change Step 5 of the previous process.

5) Buy a monster (from the visually old list); List changes to new list but cloned bug included.

I think the easiest way to fix this is just to comment out or remove the code that changes the store stock after you sell a monster, it is unnecessary given the way the stock naturally changes over time, coupled with the restock button.

In my experience, the store's stock only gets refreshed when either:
- you sell a monster
- a new monster is born, and kept instead of released
- you buy a restock

Currently, only the first of those three seems to trigger the bug if timed right.
As such, the only means by which the store "changes naturally over time" is tied to the breeding and keeping of new monsters.
If anything, I'd suggest replacing the restock upon selling a monster plus the restock upon keeping a newly bred monster with a restock every 10 days or so.

[Ironvein]

As such, the only means by which the store "changes naturally over time" is tied to the breeding and keeping of new monsters.
If anything, I'd suggest replacing the restock upon selling a monster plus the restock upon keeping a newly bred monster with a restock every 10 days or so.

Not quite sure that's right. The way I've noticed the store 'changing naturally over time' is this:

On day change, entire stock individually has something like a 50/50 chance of being kept/dropped; then a random number of new monsters may be added to the list (hence the changes in stock size). The special events (client sell, monster birth <? really, .... just why?>, restock button) clears the current list and makes a new one from scratch.

Speaking of day change (I've mentioned it before, but it's been a while); the first of the month does not count as a day in the case of pregnancy <countdown doesn't change>. Minor Bug I'd think.

[bmn]

Now who's be judgemental? I don't like the store refresh with client sell because it is an unnatural relationship within the metadata. The relationship within the game is: Store provides the 'pieces' that you need to make the 'products' the clients wants. The store and client relationship goes through the player. Adding extra relationships, just complicates code down the line. It isn't a big deal at this point as it really should be a single line of code added or removed depending on which direction HBomb takes it, but it's bad coding practice to do so. The UI refresh SHOULD have already fixed this, but it seems he only applied it to pens, causing this unexpected but similar error to manifest. HBomb needs to consider his metadata more thoroughly before he gets the code too complicated to fix.

What in the fuck are you talking about?

[Ironvein]

What in the fuck are you talking about?

Programming thing. Not really important if you are just a player. If you are a programmer, you should know what metadata is already.

[bmn]

What in the fuck are you talking about?

Programming thing. Not really important if you are just a player. If you are a programmer, you should know what metadata is already.

I have an AS in Computer Science and your entire post is complete nonsense.

[Ironvein]

What in the fuck are you talking about?

Programming thing. Not really important if you are just a player. If you are a programmer, you should know what metadata is already.

I have an AS in Computer Science and your entire post is complete nonsense.

Then you didn't get your money's worth. My BS in Information Technology trumps.

Metadata is in simplest terms: data about data; usually in reference to databases, but it also refers in OOP to how the objects SHOULD interact with each other. Ideally, if this program was diagramed, there would not be any circular references.

Where in this case you have this:

Store (resource pool) -> Player (buying and selling monsters) -> Client (sold to clients) -> Store (resets stock on sale)

This is a circular reference and a bad programming practice. Yes, it CAN be done; but it's not a good idea to do it as it leads to more bugs and more places for them to hide. This is all planned on an abstract level before code is even written, to save time when you actually write code.

You may know some programming languages with your AS, but they rarely teach you HOW to code at that level. There is a difference.

Besides, it's not a big deal yet (get a grip). This bug is probably just a carryover from before the restock button was even implemented and he needed a way to change the stock.

Believe me or no, I don't really care; I'm just trying to help Hbomb with his game and maybe give him some ways to code more methodically. If you have a better idea, let's hear it instead of being simply a nay-sayer.

[Justapuppet]

Spoiler (click to show/hide):

Then you didn't get your money's worth. My BS in Information Technology trumps.

Metadata is in simplest terms: data about data; usually in reference to databases, but it also refers in OOP to how the objects SHOULD interact with each other. Ideally, if this program was diagramed, there would not be any circular references.

Where in this case you have this:

Store (resource pool) -> Player (buying and selling monsters) -> Client (sold to clients) -> Store (resets stock on sale)

This is a circular reference and a bad programming practice. Yes, it CAN be done; but it's not a good idea to do it as it leads to more bugs and more places for them to hide. This is all planned on an abstract level before code is even written, to save time when you actually write code.

You may know some programming languages with your AS, but they rarely teach you HOW to code at that level. There is a difference.

Besides, it's not a big deal yet (get a grip). This bug is probably just a carryover from before the restock button was even implemented and he needed a way to change the stock.

Believe me or no, I don't really care; I'm just trying to help Hbomb with his game and maybe give him some ways to code more methodically. If you have a better idea, let's hear it instead of being simply a nay-sayer.

I think it was just the post was hard to follow, even apart from terminology. Talking about relationships in the game, then about some UI refresh, then something or other.... It definitely sounded more esoteric than helpful.

Anyways, really I think that's more of an issue of higher-level design than programming practice. The code can be perfect but it's the weirdness in the way it works that would cause problems. If we better understood the rationale behind these relationships we could probably sort out whether or not it really is bad design, too, but I don't think we've heard anything in a while.

[bmn]

Then you didn't get your money's worth. My BS in Information Technology trumps.

I don't understand. Did you buy your degree?

You may know some programming languages with your AS, but they rarely teach you HOW to code at that level. There is a difference.

If you have a better idea, let's hear it instead of being simply a nay-sayer.

Right, what the industry really needs is more "idea guys" who can whine about code they've never seen on a forum as opposed to people actually writing things

[Ironvein]

Spoiler (click to show/hide):

Then you didn't get your money's worth. My BS in Information Technology trumps.

Metadata is in simplest terms: data about data; usually in reference to databases, but it also refers in OOP to how the objects SHOULD interact with each other. Ideally, if this program was diagramed, there would not be any circular references.

Where in this case you have this:

Store (resource pool) -> Player (buying and selling monsters) -> Client (sold to clients) -> Store (resets stock on sale)

This is a circular reference and a bad programming practice. Yes, it CAN be done; but it's not a good idea to do it as it leads to more bugs and more places for them to hide. This is all planned on an abstract level before code is even written, to save time when you actually write code.

You may know some programming languages with your AS, but they rarely teach you HOW to code at that level. There is a difference.

Besides, it's not a big deal yet (get a grip). This bug is probably just a carryover from before the restock button was even implemented and he needed a way to change the stock.

Believe me or no, I don't really care; I'm just trying to help Hbomb with his game and maybe give him some ways to code more methodically. If you have a better idea, let's hear it instead of being simply a nay-sayer.

I think it was just the post was hard to follow, even apart from terminology. Talking about relationships in the game, then about some UI refresh, then something or other.... It definitely sounded more esoteric than helpful.

Anyways, really I think that's more of an issue of higher-level design than programming practice. The code can be perfect but it's the weirdness in the way it works that would cause problems. If we better understood the rationale behind these relationships we could probably sort out whether or not it really is bad design, too, but I don't think we've heard anything in a while.

I was just attempting to explain the 'reason' that the code governing the store refresh on a client sale should be removed. It'll take care of the bug and prevent unforeseen bugs to appear incase Hbomb makes another change to either the client or the store. Otherwise, a change in either would require a change in both.

[Grey]

Hello! I'd like to donate to this project but the link is down. Any news when that'll be an option again?

Thanks!

[Ironvein]

Hello! I'd like to donate to this project but the link is down. Any news when that'll be an option again?

Thanks!

Don't know, Hbomb has been incommunicado since he missed the last update date. Lots of issues at home as I understand it.

[domevlo]

I have an AS in Computer Science and your entire post is complete nonsense.

Then you didn't get your money's worth. My BS in Information Technology trumps.

Metadata is in simplest terms: data about data; usually in reference to databases, but it also refers in OOP to how the objects SHOULD interact with each other. Ideally, if this program was diagramed, there would not be any circular references.

Where in this case you have this:

Store (resource pool) -> Player (buying and selling monsters) -> Client (sold to clients) -> Store (resets stock on sale)

This is a circular reference and a bad programming practice. Yes, it CAN be done; but it's not a good idea to do it as it leads to more bugs and more places for them to hide. This is all planned on an abstract level before code is even written, to save time when you actually write code.


You may know some programming languages with your AS, but they rarely teach you HOW to code at that level. There is a difference.

Besides, it's not a big deal yet (get a grip). This bug is probably just a carryover from before the restock button was even implemented and he needed a way to change the stock.

Believe me or no, I don't really care; I'm just trying to help Hbomb with his game and maybe give him some ways to code more methodically. If you have a better idea, let's hear it instead of being simply a nay-sayer.

I have an MS in Information Technology turnips, and M is way higher than B, so there.

Metadata is data about meta, except when meta is about data, but it's data in a base, but the base data is meta so it's a metabase. Also this circle diagram SHOULD interact with oopsie objects, but clearly people are not as smart as me, therefore the ideal circles are diagrams.

Where in even as more tries to do more like:

Store (sells pools) -> Player (a monster that can be bought or sold) -> Client (sold into slavery) -> Store (sells things, like pools)

Also, the MS must go above and beyond a piddly BS, therefore a bar graph:
Fig A |==============
Fig B |==========
Fig C |====================
Fig D |======

And a pie chart:

O

As the chart clearly shows, the percentage of time I spend being right (white/blue/clear portion) is significantly greater than yours (green portion). You will notice that the green is an abstraction, in that it is one of the colours that makes the white/blue/clear portion, and since those are the colours of my rightness, you are only right inasmuch as you are proving that I am right when I call you wholly and unequivocally wrong.

You may know some programming languages, but they don't teach you at your level HOW to code, which by definition means that they don't teach you programming languages, unless you disregard non-programming languages (AKA languages), in which case structure (abstracts and outlines) and form (code) are each separate from the whole, leaving "programming languages" and "coding" to be two completely empty and meaningless sounds (since two mutually inclusive things cannot exist in a mutually exclusive state), which means to argue the matter offers as much profundity as that fart noise you make when you cup your hand under your armpit and flap like a chicken.

That's right. Etymological philosophy, bitchsticks. I just got meta. All up in your base. Your metabase.

Besides, it's not a big deal (except that it is, because I just blew your mindhole). My being right is probably just a carryover of you being not as awesome as me. That's why I'm going to tell Mr. Bomb that he's doing this project all wrong, and assure the world that I could do a much better job (seriously, person who has made a significant accomplishment while I sat there holding my dick and watching, get on my level).

Then again, maybe flouncing about like an ass isn't the best way to offer well-meaning and constructive criticism. Maybe I shouldn't be assuming that I know better than an accomplished programmer who has created something that I respect and enjoy, and maybe lording my mad (and thus unproven) programming skillz over a mass of people whom I've never met, on a form that's littered with seasoned and accomplished programmers... well, maybe that isn't the best way to go about things.

Nahh. Y'all are dumb and you smell like poo and your mothers dress you funny. BOW BEFORE MY MIGHTY ARBITRARY TITLE, MAGGOTS!

[Zeus Kabob]

-snip-

-snarp-

-major snippage-

This is getting absurd. Calm down yous guys, dick measuring contests never get anywhere.