From: Dancer V. <da...@us...> - 2005-01-19 02:28:02
|
On Tue, 2005-01-18 at 10:59 -0800, Jeff Freedman wrote: > Dancer Vesperman wrote: > > Welcome back:-) Err, I've not really been away....exactly..Just...err...distracted. > >Possibly we can use an intercept-and-override system. I'm thinking out > >loud here. Say we have the original data files. Assorted things are > >contained in those files. A unique key would be filename+position > >(that's the position in the file, either an absolute offset, or a > >shapeid, or an index). > > > >Say, then, that we add an override or patch directory that contains > >various things (text strings, shapes, gumps, usecode, whatever) - > >bunches of patches (for language, bugfixes, cheats, or anything else). > > > We already do. Most files are first looked up in 'patch', then in > 'static'. The .vga files are used from both, so you can override > individual shapes in the 'patch' version. Ah, see what you miss when you're not quite paying attention? :) > > > >Each patch-set has an index, giving a filename+position key for the > >object that it is _replacing_, and a reference to the patchfiles for the > >replacement object/string/whatever. > > > This is much more sophisticated then what we have now. Indeed. Downside is that it is more complicated, and would impact the general structure of object access. Upside is that you could replace virtually anything. |