Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
Can you upload the script ?
Original comment by HuguesLe...@gmail.com
on 1 Mar 2013 at 1:46
Sure, this only detects and he wasn't able to figure out how to deal with VMAD
or the subrecord for linked refs.
Original comment by arthmoor
on 1 Mar 2013 at 6:15
Attachments:
Maybe just mark XLRL field as benign so they'll be ignored when ITM filtering?
Original comment by zila...@gmail.com
on 4 Mar 2013 at 11:53
No, that wouldn't be good because they're not benign subrecords. They're only
useless if they're the only change made to a record.
Original comment by arthmoor
on 4 Mar 2013 at 8:42
Could I assume that if an XLRL SubRecord is added to a form that does not have
one, this would be a benign change ?
Otherwise, checking for that on every MainRecord is going to be far too much
time consuming for the default ITM detection.
Original comment by HuguesLe...@gmail.com
on 4 Mar 2013 at 9:40
If it's the ONLY thing being added to the form, then yes.
Original comment by arthmoor
on 4 Mar 2013 at 9:47
Do those two capture (from USKP) look ok for you ?
Original comment by HuguesLe...@gmail.com
on 4 Mar 2013 at 10:13
Attachments:
Yes, those two pics look fine. As long as that XLRL remains editable that
should be good to test.
Original comment by arthmoor
on 4 Mar 2013 at 10:43
I'll upload an experimental version for the others to check it. It is
definitivly not very "proper".
Original comment by HuguesLe...@gmail.com
on 4 Mar 2013 at 10:50
Making them benign does just that - useless if they're the only change made to
a record. As soon as anything else is changed in reference, the record is no
longer ITM no matter the XLRL field.
Original comment by zila...@gmail.com
on 5 Mar 2013 at 7:58
However is there any difference between adding XLRL and modifying an existing
one?
Original comment by zila...@gmail.com
on 5 Mar 2013 at 8:54
Modifying an existing one should not be treated as benign, obviously.
Original comment by arthmoor
on 5 Mar 2013 at 9:53
Obviously for you :)
For me not so much. CK adds them when touching a reference, but Skyrim.esm
doesn't have them and still works just fine. So for me they are all benign no
matter if added, removed or modified.
Original comment by zila...@gmail.com
on 5 Mar 2013 at 4:59
That may be, but why ask if you already concluded an answer? :P
It's not a field that can be edited directly in the CK, so what its values are
is already beyond our control anyway.
Original comment by arthmoor
on 5 Mar 2013 at 7:20
Well, that's why I asked you how does it affect the game. Does assigning a
bogus XLRL messes references, scripts, scenes or anything else? For example if
I open USKP and change some XLRL to random location, will it break anything?
Original comment by zila...@gmail.com
on 5 Mar 2013 at 8:08
Assigning a bogus one might cause a few problems for aliases in quests but
beyond that it probably won't have much effect.
BTW, the version you sent me with this change included seems to be working
fine. No issues encountered thus far.
Original comment by arthmoor
on 14 Mar 2013 at 12:54
This ought to be closed now, right? It's active in 3.0.29 and working as
desired.
Original comment by arthmoor
on 20 Mar 2013 at 2:41
Original comment by HuguesLe...@gmail.com
on 20 Mar 2013 at 8:28
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
arthmoor
on 28 Feb 2013 at 11:34Attachments: