[Scummvm-devel] Re: opcode comments =?iso-8859-2?Q?(Was:=A0CVS:=A0scummvm/scumm=A0script=5Fv2.cpp=2C2.211?= ,2.2Re:�CVS:�scummvm/scumm�script v =?iso-8859-2?Q?(Was:�CVS:�scummvm/scumm�script_v2.cpp,2.211,2.2Re:=A0CVS:?= =?iso-8859-2?Q?=A0scummvm/scumm=A0script_v2.cpp=2C2.211=2C2.212=A0script_?= _v5.cpp=?iso-8859-2?Q?=2C1.206=2C1.207?=
pablo at omega.xtr.net.pl
Mon Nov 10 11:40:13 CET 2003
> Am Montag, 10.11.03 um 12:27 Uhr schrieb Pawel Kolodziejski:
>>> Am Montag, 10.11.03 um 10:16 Uhr schrieb Pawel Kolodziejski:
>>>> Update of /cvsroot/scummvm/scummvm/scumm
>>>> In directory sc8-pr-cvs1:/tmp/cvs-serv5808
>>>> Modified Files:
>>>> script_v2.cpp script_v5.cpp
>>>> Log Message:
>>>> added subopcode comments
>>> What do you mean, "added subopcode comments" ? You replaced clear
>>> english comments by cryptic ones. Who ever said that we have to use
>>> these "SO_FOO" constants ? They are nothing "official" in any way. So
>>> where is the point?
>> Some comments are before diffrent named between script versions, now is
>> more clear what is subcode. Better solution is replace constants value
>> names opcodes.
> I disagree. These values change between different script versions. If
> we start to making enums for them for each script version, what do we
> gain? Seems pointless to me, added work with no return benefit.
> And in any case, those SO_FOO names are not "canonical" in any way, so
> why should we use those? How did you make them up, anyway? Do you have
> access to Scumm source and are copying them from there??? I hope not,
> because that would seriously put us in legal troubles (but of course
> you wouldn't so incredibly stupid to use names from illegally obtained
> source code in ScummVM. Would you...?)
That names are taken from some executables of HE and LEC games.
More information about the Scummvm-devel