Gaalidas

Considering KerbPaint really doesn't work properly in 0.90, I'm curious as to how a KerbPaint requirement works out.

I haven't even attempted to launch the first version of this thing. It's down right scary. I wonder what kind of madness would go into trying to create a set of auto-transition modes for the different stages of a launch so that a launch autopilot could be attempted. I suppose you'd need to write a plugin to out those presets into the staging list so that mechjeb could auto-stage them. hmm...

funky. really funky.

Couldn't you just do this? @PART[FNInlineRefineryLarge]:NEEDS[NearFutureElectrical|SETI]:FOR[WarpPlugin] { @MODULE[FNModuleResourceExtraction],* { @powerConsumptionLand *= 0.02 @powerConsumptionOcean *= 0.02 } } Someone correct me if I'm wrong...

Huh, I was sure I'd made sure that the configs were all in their correct places last time I updated. oh well, I'll take a look again.

Hey, I really hope this hasn't been reported and/or fixed lately, but I was just going through my log today, looking for exceptions relating to a mod I'm revamping, and I caught this in relation to QuickScroll: [EXC 18:27:37.560] ArgumentException: The requested value 'left shift' was not found. System.Enum.Parse (System.Type enumType, System.String value, Boolean ignoreCase) System.Enum.Parse (System.Type enumType, System.String value) ConfigNode.ParseEnum (System.Type enumType, System.String vectorString) ConfigNode.ReadValue (System.Type fieldType, System.String value) ConfigNode.ReadObject (System.Object obj, .ConfigNode node) ConfigNode.LoadObjectFromConfig (System.Object obj, .ConfigNode node, Int32 pass, Boolean removeAfterUse) ConfigNode.LoadObjectFromConfig (System.Object obj, .ConfigNode node) QuickScroll.QSettings.Load () QuickScroll.QuickScroll.Start ()...and I thought you might be interested. The entry in the output_log is identical, other than the fact that it's spaced out more.

These wheels and tracks are more complicated than the standard ones, and actually respond to each other when part of the same craft, so it's possible that attaching them to a part using the KIS system could interrupt the process by which they initialize themselves.

I just love the fact that you've got a full interior right off the bat. That's awesome.

I like it... especially the name.

The author of this baby has been kinda-sorta missing for quite some time. It's quite sad. That being said... it's unlikely that the OP will be updated for the dependencies and such.

Yeah, that's the short version of what I said above... if you get a headache reading my super-sized posts. Moving on... So, lo-fi, I'm seeing your tracks in more and more images in the Spacecraft Exchange forum. The word is getting out, apparently, of your epic quest to reinvent the wheel (literally). Hey... good stuff... That would be a great catch-phrase for the mod. "Kerbal Foundries: Reinventing the wheel, literally!" - - - Updated - - - Hah, that reminds me of the lead tech for the sound department in my church. He says "I'm willing to consider any suggestions for something that needs to be done. I'd be quite happy to show them where the ladders are stored, too."

Me too. As it turns out, over-feeding an intern with too many super-kerbal-snacks (work in progress merger between rocket fuel and kerbal snacks, unusual side effects can be... volatile...) and dropping the intended cargo on top of him with the angle set up just right for optimal trajectory with the Mun... ... well, lets just say he's retired now and leave it at that. The cargo isn't on the Mun either...

That's definitely a tiny little bugger there.

I tried making a giant rover with them... even the KF modification of the RBI mole track couldn't budge it. Still trying though.

Okay, I think we need a sarcasm sign now. I wasn't sure what you were meaning at all. Come to think of it, I don't get that stuff right off the bat in the real world either. Must be my autistic side. You think I'm kidding, right? Wrong, I've got a little bit of autism... it can be fun sometimes, and irritating teh rest of the time. What really sucks though is that I'm not autistic enough to be oblivious to the oddities I have, so I can annoy myself without even trying. Configuring sharpdevelop to use mono... holy -snipped kerbal expletives and colorful metaphors- that's exactly what I was thinking about last night. I was thinking it would be awesome if that could be configured. I worry about one thing though (well, okay, hundreds of things, but that's due to an anxiety disorder and not related to this question) moving on... one thing I worry about: will I need to change how the code works for it to be compatible with Mono? Also, I'm going to have to see if this method works with the more recent released on SharpDevelop, there are annoying bugs with the older versions that I can't go back to. Totally unrelated, the people around me right now are talking about a disease that shares a name with this stuff... adn the guy to my left is cracking mono puns over and over...and he's not even the pun master of the choir. People are sick... but entertaining. EDIT: Okay, this is starting to seriously .... me off. I just followed the instructions on how to set up SharpDevelop to use Mono, installing Mono first and then compiling the sample plugin and getting the Mono entries into the "new solution" menu and what happens when the little feedback console comes up? I get greeted with "Mono is not installed." Yes it is you stupid program, I just did that! EDIT2: what the bleep? It replaced the word for what you do when you use the toilet, the liquid format, in the above sentence. It's a perfectly valid bodily function for the love of.. -sigh-

Those strange computer platforms can be tricky, indeed. I try to stay away from anything that claims to be "easy to use, even for the beginner" because I just know it's going to bite me in the ... uh... donkey... ahem. yeah...

Well, I definitely like it... beyond these issues I'm having that is. I'm getting top grades in my classes due in aprt to it's rather helpful suggestions. Of course, I have no experience with Visual Studio or Monodevelop in this sort of stuff. The last time I dabbled in programming was back in the VB6 days, before .net had any momentum.

When I saw the title of this thread which stated "media is up" I have hoped to see a Kerbal with obvious signs of radiation poisoning and an obvious radioactive glow. Now I'm sad. - - - Updated - - - As for that, I'd think if "atmospheres shield you from radiation" then simply giving Jool a false atmosphere that crosses the wires on that protection function would do the trick. The further you go in, the more likely you are to grow an extra limb with it's own sentience from your left ear that will try to devour you and assume your identity, only to return to Kerbin and kille evryone you ever loved and, even worse, eat all of your kerbal-snack stocks you've been saving for the end of the world. - - - Updated - - - Nice to know someone's trying to run KSP on a worse PC setup than I am. You sure know how to brighten a man's day.

I really hate that thought. It feels redundant considering I already have an editing environment that I like. It's really irritating though. I have installed (or tried anyway) all the SDK/framework packages I can find that don't say "it'll destroy you and your computer and make your mother cry" and I still get a report that the .net reference uhh... stuff... cannot be found and that it will simply compile from the GAC (I always feel like I'm gagging myself when I type that... yes, I'm that strange.) and that it "might" not be targetted correctly. the nice thing is that the part of the plugin that was causing exceptions on load in KSP are no longer making exception, so I'm calling it semi-solved. It'd be nice if I could just use a different compilation package that didn't require the .net targeting package, but i'd probably have to start using Monodevelop which kinda defeats the purpose of having an editing environment that you can use effectively already. I think this whole .net thing has become way too complicated and is now defeating it's own intended purpose with all of these version mismatches and lack of full backwards compatibility. It's only marginally better than the old C++ redistribution packages, of which I have about 60 separate packages of, all named exactly the same, half of them the same version number, just to make sure everything runs smoothly. And even then, smooth is not always produced. I really need a vacation, except that I'm a Asperger Syndrome computer geek who would get more stressed trying to relax somewhere else than just staying home. Maybe I should just take up alcohol. No, I'm not sure what my brain would turn into then... okay, I'll stop talking now. This is depressing... if slightly amuzing at the same time. - - - Updated - - - We might, however, be able to create some sort of memory for what you had your height at, which is saved upon activating a certain action/GUI-option which then proceeds to slowly lower the repulsor height and eventually shut down. Upon loading the craft again, you could simply toggle that option back and have it slowly dial it back up to where it left off. What do you think, lo-fi? Technically, it would be just like lowering the craft manually, then turning the repulsors off. All that really changes in the automation and a little saved variable in the part's persistent state. I say it like it's a piece of cake (but the cake is a lie... sorry, got carried away there) when I really have no idea where to start, but I have a pretty good idea where we can start on the whole "slowly settle" and "slowly raise" thing. It would be an interesting distraction anyway. - - - Updated - - - That's why we need controlled release. I remember back in the day, you launch your new floater (rover just doesn't work when you're repulsing, does it?) and suddenly it lurched toward the sky, crashes down while overwhelming the repulsor's "suspension" and causing all sorts of problems with things that... as Jeb would put it... "go BANG quite spectacularly with absolutely no red buttons being pushed... by me... over there on that console... nope, not one red button has been pushed here... don't judge me because I'm a genius..." well, you get the picture.

Ah, in that case, I could be mistaken then. I am not quite as familiar with all of this than the veteran programmer. I simply made the assumption that you were talking about the entire package (editing environment and compiler together). I think the point I'm trying to make is that in my recent posts (other than the ones in response to you) were leaning in the direction of "all seems good for the time being" and so I really don't think I actually need much more help at this time... (subject to change at any moment if my brain starts failing me again... stupid brain. I want a refund.. it's definitely not as smart as the one advertised.) I'm using the software provided by the SharpDevelop people. If the case is that the compiler is a Visual Studio equivalent, or even the exact same compiler, then I apologize for my error. I believe I may have simply taken a little bit of offense to your apparent ignorance of what forms of software for doing this sort of development are available. I believe that was an error on my part, especially considering your reputation around here which would suggest you are quite intelligent. Maybe even intelligent enough for sentience. (I jest here.) Still, I was not posting anything of the sort, as you are suggesting, a "it does not work" message. Yes, that is the overall message, but I do not just post a "help, I won't tell you what's wrong, but you gotta fix it!!!" I would rather my PC melt in front of me, taking my legs with it, than go back to my pre-competent-geek days. Those were dark times. Also, soem confusion might have been produced given the little known fact that I've been working with lo-fi for a while now on his Kerbal Foundries mod, and thus my comment about "asking for trouble" may not have hit the same "familiarity" level of communication with the rest of you whom I've had less experience working with. EDIT: I also have the unfortunate tendency to take offense to someone saying that "I'm doing something wrong" when I've been reporting back that I have done what is suggested and instructed, plus a number of things that could solve the problem, which have all been failing me. Anyway, it's an unfortunate personality flaw I'm afraid.

First, I mean that I do not use Visual Studio, and there's more out there available than Mono to fill in the gaps. Command-line would actually make things very difficult for me. Do a little more research and you'll find that there's more to this world than VS and Mono. You'll be amazed, I assure you. Second, I cannot have them all installed in tandem, as they won't install together. Declaring that what I am saying is false without providing a solution to the problem is just being argumentative. I'm sitting right here, double clicking on a setup file that refuses to run. I haven't been messing with PCs since i was 3 years old on a PC Junior (no hard drive, two literally floppy disks just to boot it up) to miss some obvious user error that would lead you to point out that you believe I can have something installed that, as i will assure you right now, refuses to even try to install. In fact, I've been told that if I have the 4.5 edition, I also have all the others, yet my compiler refuses to use anything but version 4 in the correct manner. However, it seems that compiling under 3.5 even when it cannot find the correct assembles has worked, because KSP has stopped returning load errors. And third, I have not simply posted a message saying "in does not work." I have, instead, been having a long conversation across several messages. I am not going to restate the entire conversation in each message in an attempt to explain myself fully when one person decides that I'm taking bovine excrement when i claim that something isn't workiing as expected. So, if you take time to read the posts you have missed you'll find out that I have explained it. If you are unable to understand that still, then I'm afraid I cannot help you because I lack the professional degrees to properly diagnose the malfunction happening there. I'm sorry for that, but I'm sure you'll find help eventually and I don't think it will be life threatening.

Nooo... no no no... not ... useless... well, a little bit.. kinda... okay, yeah, sorta useless. But pretty! very pretty.... I better just shut up now...

That is some sweet stuff there.

I'm probably asking for trouble by not using VS at all. - - - Updated - - - I'm all out of options though, so if it's working now I'm going to run with it.

It's a grand mystery, indeed. I attempted to compile it without the proper stuff, letting it use whatever it could find that would work, and... oddly enough, no more errors on loading up KSP. We'll see if it actually does anything though. - - - Updated - - - The thing about that download is that the file won't even run. Even after I extract it manually and try to run the setup file, it works for half a second and then quits with no message or anything. My guess is that it will only function if it doesn't detect an even or higher version already installed. That means, if I can compile under .net 4.0, I will never be able to compile under anything lower than that because it can't be installed at the same time. Searches on the subject seem to confirm that, but at the same time those same results say that having a higher version of the framework installed also allows you to make use of any previous versions, which I am discovering is not the case. At this time I'm calling it an issue with SharpDevelop (the software I use to develop this stuff) and it's probably not an error at all, but simply a warning that I might not be able to effectively prepare my project for that specific platform without the full SDK for that version installed. Considering KSP uses a framework that is a bit behind the times, compiling for that specific platform with the idea that the intended audience will need to upgrade to that version is unlikely to be the case since we will all likely have a version much higher than the requested version installed. It still remains a mystery as to why I can run some plugins in KSP with 4.0, and others on the boards have reported no issue with using 4.5 even, but this specific stuff will only function under 3.5. It's a very confusing mystery.