The option to delete leftover images can also used without generating a report, it also doesn't need the entire source-code(in the options is described what you do need) New in the report is that you can disable it, as it costs a ton of processing power, as well as a fourth new list that tells you what images aren't in first 2 lists, with the option of deleting them, to make the pack lighter. It will detect any folder in its scan area that has the Corruption-of-Champions.iml file in it as CoC source-code, which it can use to make a report on the imagepack. There's a bunch more options for the method of placing the images in the destination directory moving, copying and mirroring(places shortcuts in the destination directory, it needs administrator rights tho) The update has some bugfixes + GUI improvements(it looks nicer now, and you can invert your selection) Update's here, attached the new version of the results with your pack on OtherCoCAnon's source-code. The extension is too unstable at the moment to release it, so I hope this result is enough for now. I've attached the results for your imagepack with OtherCoCAnon's CoC, you won't see the minotaur win in the third column, because your pack includes those images. The third column is mostly for debugging, using it I found out forinstance that the minotaur win-scenes don't work, because they're called w in in the code, and w on in the xml file. Lastly the third column are images in the code that aren't in the xml file, they don't work at all. In the second row the program couldn't find the image location in the code, even through it was in the xml file, so there's a good chance they won't work(it is possible through). It gives this answer in 3 rows, one where the program found the image location in both the xml file and the code, which means that its most likely a working image location. I made a little experimental extension to ImgBuilder for you, now you can provide it with the source-code of a version of CoC, and it will tell you where there's no images yet. After me saying that I will stop doing both.ĭoesn't do much in the grand scale of things, but still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Both are, as it turned out, a big no-no, so I got banned for like 7 hours. one response before changing it back due what someone said about it. And changed my name from Anon to something else for like. I uh, used a different moth image with most of my responses there. To quote "Namefagging, avatarfagging, rule 0." Thankfully it's not a perma ban, which I thought it was. not that hard to find if someone wants all of them. Too many variations for me! And too much work for little effect since most people will just use one of them anyway. Some want a monstergirl, furry, some want a full-on dragon, some want male, female, herm. And yep, that does suck- at this point when I play the game, I know like all of the images already. I'm pretty sure I went through most what you have anyway, since I did look at all that at some point. How'd you get yourself banned from that mod anyway by the way? It would be nice if we could get some sort of effort to get everyone to post their imagepacks in one place. It's a bit sad that ImgBuilder hasn't come off the ground, maybe we could have had all kinds of small imagepacks to merge together as we pleased, I guess that's largely due to the thread I made for it being unfocused and not well written. Else I could lose images that look alike but aren't the same. Its not perfect, so I made the system too lenient. The other issue is that i'm pretty sure I have some duplicate images, due to how ImgBuilder has to scan a lot of images, it can't compare images for more then a second, so I made a system that does the equivalent of taking a quick glance at them. The biggest issues that I still have with my imagepack is that ember's camp scene has a disproportionate amount of monster-girl images vs furry(scaly), at least Hn0's pack lets me choose which ember pictures I want, sad that didn't stick around in the derived packs. The truth is that I've never actually gone through the images, because that way I might still get surprised by images I haven't seen before. I'd send it to you, but its nothing more then the loose folders of the imagepack and the ImgBuilder I made a while back if you recall that merges them together.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |