Omit extensions in config.cfg

drwhut / tabletop-club

An open-source platform for playing tabletop games in a physics-based 3D environment for Windows, macOS, and Linux! Made with the Godot Engine.

https://tabletopclub.net

MIT License

1.26k stars 51 forks source link

Omit extensions in config.cfg #217

Open GrimPixel opened 1 year ago

GrimPixel commented 1 year ago

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. In config.cfg, extensions have to be included for file names, while in stacks.cfg, they are omitted.

Describe the solution you'd like Omit extensions in config.cfg.

drwhut commented 1 year ago

A potential issue that can occur with this is if two files have the same name, but with different extensions. I admit it's not a likely senario, but if the config.cfg file used just the name without the extension, then how would it know which file to configure?

GrimPixel commented 1 year ago

In the stacks.cfg, there is the same question: if two files have the same name with different extensions, which one will it take? I haven't tried it yet. It is not supposed to have two files with the same name and different extensions in a set of asset, usually.

drwhut commented 1 year ago

You raise a fair point - currently the game will not add two assets with the same name (even if they have different extensions), so there could be two potential solutions:

Only allow unique names, and change config.cfg to omit extensions, as you said.
Allow duplicate names, but the game modifies the secondary names, e.g. "Ace of Clubs", then "Ace of Clubs (1)", "Ace of Clubs (2)", etc., then the extensions would actually matter.

GrimPixel commented 1 year ago

I prefer to keep unique names because extensions are omitted in game, so they are meant to be ignored.

drwhut commented 1 year ago

With the implementation of #124, this has potentially complicated things: theoretically, two assets with the same file name can now have two different names in-game using the name property.

Due to the way assets are indexed internally, it still makes sense to restrict in-game names to be unique (which is currently the case) - but due to the new property, I personally think it's okay to keep using extensions since the name property can be used to forcefully re-name one of the assets if need be.

I will keep this issue open, though in case people are against this idea.

EDIT: I forgot to mention, some users may also find it useful to apply specific properties to assets with a given extension.