| 00:27.04 | *** join/#bzflag BZnotify (~BZnotify@192.30.252.40) |
| 00:27.04 | BZnotify | [13bzflag] 15blast007 pushed 2 new commits to 062.4: 02https://git.io/vyTp6 |
| 00:27.04 | BZnotify | 13bzflag/062.4 1459ad735 15Scott Wichser: Use the manifest setting to set per-monitor high DPI awareness. |
| 00:27.04 | BZnotify | 13bzflag/062.4 14e86294f 15Scott Wichser: Clean up the help text for the /reload command. |
| 00:27.04 | *** part/#bzflag BZnotify (~BZnotify@192.30.252.40) |
| 00:34.02 | *** part/#bzflag mister (~chatmovil@lb.jabb.im) |
| 01:12.49 | jnoob22 | anyone know what this error is all about when running `make` ? http://pastebin.com/ugbQ33GR |
| 01:13.29 | jnoob22 | from latest release from github btw. |
| 01:13.51 | blast007 | latest release, or latest 2.4 branch? |
| 01:14.48 | jnoob22 | sry, latest 2.4 branch |
| 01:15.38 | allejo | it's taking exception to the range based for loop |
| 01:16.18 | jnoob22 | I was wanting to just check it out and have a look see. I'm a complete amateur. Is that a bad idea? |
| 01:16.34 | jnoob22 | at least with latest code |
| 01:17.38 | blast007 | what version of gcc? |
| 01:18.17 | blast007 | 'gcc -v' should show |
| 01:21.16 | jnoob22 | gcc version 4.4.7 20120313 (Red Hat 4.4.7-17) (GCC) |
| 01:25.34 | blast007 | that's a bit old. debian stable is 4.9.2. |
| 01:26.02 | jnoob22 | I'm on CentOs 6.8 |
| 01:26.09 | jnoob22 | so, that kind of makes sense. |
| 01:26.23 | *** mode/#bzflag [-v Foo_man_choo] by ChanServ |
| 01:26.27 | blast007 | CentOS 7 has 4.8.5 |
| 01:26.32 | jnoob22 | ok |
| 01:26.47 | jnoob22 | I'll look into upgrading. It's about time anyways |
| 01:26.48 | BulletCatcher | I get the same error on RHEL6. We ought to be able to support that for now. |
| 01:26.59 | blast007 | we'll probably be using more C++11 features, and 4.8 seems to have much better support for that |
| 01:27.29 | Foo_man_choo | And deb 9 has gcc version 6.3.0 20170205 |
| 01:46.08 | *** join/#bzflag hilmy (~hilmy@156.222.66.120) |
| 01:50.31 | *** join/#bzflag bertman (~bert@unaffiliated/bertman) |
| 01:59.41 | *** join/#bzflag gk^__-__^1wm (~su@23.27.14.52) |
| 01:59.42 | *** part/#bzflag gk^__-__^1wm (~su@23.27.14.52) |
| 02:09.47 | *** join/#bzflag gk^_-_^1wm (~su@23.27.14.199) |
| 02:37.58 | *** join/#bzflag gk[]\`_^{}1wm (~su@63.141.198.123) |
| 02:43.18 | *** join/#bzflag gk[]\`_^{1wm (~su@23.27.14.16) |
| 04:07.25 | the_map | ~allejo++ |
| 04:27.50 | *** join/#bzflag matheweis (~matheweis@47.215.197.160) |
| 04:28.16 | matheweis | @macsforme o hai |
| 04:58.41 | *** join/#bzflag matheweis (~matheweis@47.215.197.160) |
| 05:55.41 | Foo_man_choo | O_o o_O |
| 06:41.53 | *** join/#bzflag hilmy (~hilmy@156.222.66.120) |
| 10:36.44 | *** join/#bzflag tupone (~alfredo@gentoo/developer/tupone) |
| 11:37.44 | *** join/#bzflag bertman (~bert@unaffiliated/bertman) |
| 11:39.15 | *** mode/#bzflag [+o blast007] by ChanServ |
| 11:40.26 | *** mode/#bzflag [+b gk*!*su@*] by blast007 |
| 11:40.34 | *** mode/#bzflag [-o blast007] by blast007 |
| 11:47.58 | *** join/#bzflag disco-_ (~disco@unaffiliated/disco-) |
| 16:02.36 | *** join/#bzflag bertman (~bert@unaffiliated/bertman) |
| 16:17.54 | *** join/#bzflag nadir (uid134094@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-ahpldveykocipvbz) |
| 16:56.00 | *** join/#bzflag bertman (~bert@unaffiliated/bertman) |
| 17:21.21 | blast007 | so are we still wanting to support GCC versions older than 4.8? |
| 17:35.15 | macsforme | 4.8 was originally released in March 2013? |
| 17:39.53 | blast007 | probably |
| 17:40.11 | macsforme | I'm not familiar with which distro versions have which GCC versions, other the ones that have already been discussed |
| 17:41.01 | blast007 | the last version of Red Hat / CentOS, which is still supported until 2020, has 4.4.7 |
| 17:41.11 | blast007 | the current CentOS has 4.8.5 |
| 17:41.36 | blast007 | distrowatch.com shows the versions of common packages |
| 17:42.09 | blast007 | Debian stable has 4.9.2 |
| 17:42.46 | blast007 | (and they're months away from a new Debian release that will have 6.3.0) |
| 17:44.00 | blast007 | "As of GCC 4.8.1, GCC's C++11 mode implements all of the major features of the C++11 standard produced by the ISO C++ committee." https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.8/cxx0x_status.html https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.4/cxx0x_status.html |
| 17:48.13 | BulletCatcher | I sort of want to support Red Hat and CentOS 6, but their default gcc version is 4.4.7. |
| 17:48.17 | BulletCatcher | The good news is that newer versions (including 5 and 6) are avalable in the Red Hat Software Collections repos. |
| 17:48.18 | BulletCatcher | I'll have to experiment to see how easily that gets the job done. |
| 17:49.11 | blast007 | are we packaged in CentOS? |
| 17:49.21 | BulletCatcher | no |
| 17:49.56 | BulletCatcher | Which is another reason to be sure motiviated people can build it there themselves. |
| 17:54.23 | BulletCatcher | I have a CentOS 6 system to test on, but won't be able to get to that until later today. |
| 17:55.10 | blast007 | we could make it build again with GCC 4.4 for the 2.4.10 release and then require 4.8.1+ after the release |
| 17:57.06 | blast007 | Visual C++ 2015 supports the vast majority of the C++11 spec |
| 17:57.28 | blast007 | https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh567368.aspx |
| 18:04.41 | BulletCatcher | If we are going to choose to depend on c++11 then I don't see it making much of a difference whether we do it before or after we release 2.4.10. |
| 18:17.00 | blast007 | well, there's probably just one thing preventing it from building with 4.4 right now |
| 18:32.28 | BulletCatcher | I tried and failed to change the "for (auto pollType : customPollTypes)" syntax to something acceptable to an older compiler. |
| 18:33.03 | BulletCatcher | It seems to require a change to more than just that line. |
| 18:52.55 | macsforme | for (auto pollType = customPollTypes.begin(); pollType != customPollTypes.end(); ++pollType) |
| 18:53.20 | macsforme | then I think just change pollType. to pollType-> on the next line |
| 18:58.08 | macsforme | and I think the if-test surrounding that block is redundant... iterating over an empty map will still do nothing |
| 19:04.29 | blast007 | it builds with those changes on Debian Sqeeze (gcc 4.4.5) |
| 19:05.14 | blast007 | also, haven't checked why, just thought it was funny. Joined the server unregistered, used /password to get admin, and just typed /poll |
| 19:05.31 | blast007 | got "There needs to be at least 2 other player and only -1 are available." |
| 19:17.14 | *** join/#bzflag Zehra (~Zehra@unaffiliated/zehra) |
| 19:58.21 | *** join/#bzflag mister (~chatmovil@lb.jabb.im) |
| 20:35.26 | allejo | because /password doesn't make you eligible to vote also |
| 20:36.13 | allejo | it takes the number of players eligible to vote (0) and subtracts you from it, hence -1 |
| 20:36.43 | blast007 | heh |
| 20:45.45 | blast007 | so by default, votes required is 2 - so should that mean that at least 1 other player needs to vote yes? |
| 20:49.25 | allejo | votes required is 3, no? |
| 20:49.59 | the_map | can the subject of a poll also vote? |
| 20:50.29 | allejo | the person who started the poll automatically has their vote cast in favor |
| 20:50.50 | the_map | no, I mean like if you want to poll ban someone |
| 20:50.54 | the_map | can that someone vote? |
| 20:51.29 | allejo | yes |
| 20:51.44 | *** join/#bzflag DTRemenak (~DTRemenak@about/essy/CrazyCoder/DTRemenak) |
| 20:51.44 | *** mode/#bzflag [+v DTRemenak] by ChanServ |
| 22:26.16 | *** part/#bzflag mister (~chatmovil@lb.jabb.im) |
| 22:34.43 | blast007 | does this seem like it should display the right info now? https://gist.github.com/blast007/7a481db08eef42a62a6f1c8949933b10 when I do the same test again, it shows "There needs to be at least 2 other players and only 0 are available." |
| 22:39.53 | allejo | huh. file went from 3660+ lines to just 13. impressive |
| 22:40.41 | blast007 | :P |
| 22:40.58 | allejo | is the only change std::max()? if so, looks good to me |
| 22:41.10 | blast007 | some maths are different as well |
| 22:41.30 | blast007 | now it will say 'players' instead of 'player' when it needs 2 |
| 22:43.43 | blast007 | guess that's the two changes. the std::max, and not subtracting 1 when checking if it should use 'players' or 'player' |
| 22:49.19 | allejo | seems fine to me |
| 22:49.39 | allejo | going back to the previous topic, is there a minimum gcc version that's being picked? |
| 23:02.19 | blast007 | well, right now the only thing that GCC 4.4 can't handle is the pollType thing |
| 23:04.11 | allejo | so we can just change the ranged base for loop and not have any issues |
| 23:04.48 | blast007 | right, though we'd probably want to start requiring GCC 4.8.1+ so we can use C++11 features |
| 23:09.40 | blast007 | Visual Studio 2015, GCC 4.8.1+ and clang 3.1/3.3+ should give us pretty complete support |
| 23:13.03 | *** join/#bzflag bertman (~bert@unaffiliated/bertman) |