Closed panic-sell closed 8 months ago
No. There was a change made in 1130. I may have messed up the logic but this check requires 1130 to provide the new structure. Did you find a bug?
Oh oops. Read it backwards.
I can't test as I'm traveling. I assume you've tried accessing to confirm it works?
Yes I did.
Cool. Thanks!
I'm guessing this comparison is supposed to use the same version as line 142.
Edit to add more context: https://github.com/alandtse/CommonLibVR/blob/98c327b5c1c632ee8be4cda16ac03c219a3072cf/include/RE/C/ControlMap.h#L139C1-L147 https://github.com/alandtse/CommonLibVR/blob/98c327b5c1c632ee8be4cda16ac03c219a3072cf/include/RE/C/ControlMap.h#L149C2-L157
These are const and non-const versions of the same function, but the const one has a comparison against RUNTIME_SSE_1_6_629, while the non-const one compares against RUNTIME_SSE_1_6_1130. I'm guessing the intent is to compare against RUNTIME_SSE_1_6_1130 in both cases.