The Watcher on 26/4/2014 at 08:33
Did I say anything about not working on tools? No, I did not. I was replying purely about documentation. Documentation, especially well written and comprehensive, is always far harder to write, it generally requires a lot more time, and different skills than most coders typically have.
Given a decent spec, writing tools can be simple. Writing a decent spec is an entirely different matter.
nemyax on 26/4/2014 at 08:55
The Watcher
If you want to add .bin support to Lightwave, I can share what I know with you. You can then turn this (and other info) into a spec.
PinkDot on 26/4/2014 at 13:55
@Watcher
I'm planning to release some documentation as well at some stage. Could you point me to some example of a good specs, so I know better what the standards are?
BTW. I am also using 010 Editor for understanding the binary files. I have created so called templates, which parse the file and map values to variables. If the template parses the file with no errors, it usually means that I understand the file completely.
New Horizon on 26/4/2014 at 17:48
Quote Posted by FireMage
Larry, Darkmod is cool, but alas, the map editing isn't so easy (especialy the installation of the level editor... It's the hell on earth!),
How was it hell on earth to install? This is the first time I've ever heard anyone say installing DR is hell on earth, especially when it's probably one of the more user friendly level editors out there.
Run the installer, start Dark Radiant and then click 'file/ select game' and point DR to whatever location you installed The Dark Mod.
This should be the extent of setting up.
Inline Image:
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/qbGHG5xs1gIzbU3yFc8hzvlKqMqkDym-GyJxSgJzGE0=w889-h514-noIf you're used to subtraction based editing then you might find the editing harder, but overall most who have come from Dromed say that it's simply a different process and that the actual editing tools are much easier to use.
The Watcher on 26/4/2014 at 23:45
Quote Posted by PinkDot
Could you point me to some example of a good specs, so I know better what the standards are?
Some of the better ones I've had to work with are things like (
http://www.w3.org/TR/PNG/) PNG, (
http://partners.adobe.com/public/developer/en/tiff/TIFF6.pdf) TIFF, and the (
http://fleet.starforge.co.uk/lwsdk/filefmts/lwo2.html) LWO2 spec (with the associated (
http://fleet.starforge.co.uk/lwsdk/filefmts/lwo2ex/lwo2ex.html) examples discussion)
Things that set good specs apart from less well-written ones are things like:
* If needed, descriptions of the concepts involved in the format.
* Specification of the datatypes used through the rest of the spec, including endianness (or notes about whether the format itself specifies the endianness, like TIFF does)
* Full explanation of what each field in each part of the format: datatype used, if appropriate which values are supported, what it is for. Possibly given as either (E)BNF or c-struct with supporting explanations.
* Where appropriate, psuedocode or well-commented example code to illustrate how to generate, write, or read the more complex parts of data.
* Extra marks for diagrams - overviews of how the file is structured, how the data is structured in each chunk of the format.
* Examples, with annotations and explanations, covering at least the most common use cases.
LarryG on 27/4/2014 at 00:06
I would really like replacements for mshbld, bin2e, and BSP. Assumong that it can be done in a less buggy, more robust, and better documented manner. There is nothing wrong with 3ds based file conversion especially for those of use who don't use Lightwave or blender or Maya. Building plugins for those tool are cool, but not of the most general use. A standalone utility which will convert to/from standard graphics formats (3ds, max, obj, etc.) and bin (mesh and standard) would be of most general applicability. Then you could do a plugin front end for graphics tool of your choice while still having something that the rest of us could use.
nemyax on 27/4/2014 at 05:16
Quote Posted by LarryG
A standalone utility which will convert to/from standard graphics formats (3ds, max, obj, etc.) and bin (mesh and standard) would be of most general applicability.
The problem with standalone conversion is it has to be generic, and you have to adapt your 3D content to the conventions it imposes. Hence the crackpot naming schemes, extra garbage objects and masochistic micromanagement. Whereas a package-specific converter lets you efficiently use features that more or less directly match the tasks.
PinkDot on 27/4/2014 at 15:25
@Watcher
Thanks for the examples. (only the first two links worked for me, but that gives me some idea.) Indeed a good documentation can be a project on its own. :) Some of the file formats, like the mesh or AI .BIN files are much simpler however.
Last year, I have made an importer for 3dsmax for the .dof file format (it's a model mesh format for some free racing game). The documentation is much simpler but was generally enough for me (only a few things I had to investigate):
(
http://racer.nl/dof.htm)
---
Quote Posted by "LarryG"
I would really like replacements for mshbld, bin2e, and BSP. Assumong that it can be done in a less buggy, more robust, and better documented manner. There is nothing wrong with 3ds based file conversion especially for those of use who don't use Lightwave or blender or Maya. Building plugins for those tool are cool, but not of the most general use. A standalone utility which will convert to/from standard graphics formats (3ds, max, obj, etc.) and bin (mesh and standard) would be of most general applicability. Then you could do a plugin front end for graphics tool of your choice while still having something that the rest of us could use.
Surely, having a standalone application would be a nice thing. However, at least in my case, it's simply a matter of skills... :( I can do scripting in Max, but I can't do coding in any language that let's me do standalone apps. Not at this moment, at least.
But I believe there are some coders around who can, so let's keep fingers crossed it's a matter of them having a good documentation only... :)
Yandros on 27/4/2014 at 16:53
My coding skills these days tend to web stuff, so a console app that mashes bytes and bits and stuff is probably not a good project for me.
LarryG on 27/4/2014 at 18:34
But a user interface might be?
