Power Source Slot

**gaeorn** · #1 06-10-2009, 02:43 AM

Sorry I wasn't clear in my earlier post. I was merely trying to re-express Trevius' concern over the difficulty some people might have had updating their DBs if slot numbers had changed more radically. I was just stating this because Cavedude's post indicated it would be easy for him to convert either way.

Anyway, if what I was trying to say still isn't clear, just ignore it, lol. It somehow got all convoluted up to the point it almost doesn't make sense to me anymore.

In any case, based on Trevius' expertise with the code, I expect his judgment of which course to take was the best one. I merely was submitting a different point of view in case it had not been considered.

**trevius** · #2 06-10-2009, 05:24 AM

LOL, I don't know if "expertise" is the right word for my skill level with the source code :P

I know a ton more about it than I did 10 months ago, but I am still quite a newb at coding. I have simply read over the code repeatedly in almost every spot, so I am fairly familiar with it. The only thing I am getting decent at is understanding packet structures and how all of that stuff works. As for the actual code, I have a very long way to go before I would consider myself an "expert", LOL.

The suggestion you made really is the ideal way to go, but that doesn't mean that it is the best way to go. In the end, I don't think it would really make much of a difference in the long run, so it probably just isn't worth the extra work now.

**cavedude** · #3 06-10-2009, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gaeorn

Sorry I wasn't clear in my earlier post. I was merely trying to re-express Trevius' concern over the difficulty some people might have had updating their DBs if slot numbers had changed more radically. I was just stating this because Cavedude's post indicated it would be easy for him to convert either way.

They couldn't have, remember slots are handled by the client. If somebody started changing slot values around the items wouldn't function properly. It will always come down to a single subtraction or addition query of the slot's base binary value. The trick is, as Trevius and I were discussing is figuring out which are ammo and which are power slots (because my dumb ass changed ammo a while back and left power slots alone) but I have that worked out.

At any rate, I'll write a post-it reminding me to fix power slot items in the DB today.

**gaeorn** · #4 06-10-2009, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cavedude

They couldn't have, remember slots are handled by the client. If somebody started changing slot values around the items wouldn't function properly. It will always come down to a single subtraction or addition query of the slot's base binary value. The trick is, as Trevius and I were discussing is figuring out which are ammo and which are power slots (because my dumb ass changed ammo a while back and left power slots alone) but I have that worked out.

At any rate, I'll write a post-it reminding me to fix power slot items in the DB today.

I know the slot numbers are hard coded on the client. I meant the numbers used on the server end since the two clients disagree on a few slot numbers.

**cavedude** · #5 06-10-2009, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gaeorn

I know the slot numbers are hard coded on the client. I meant the numbers used on the server end since the two clients disagree on a few slot numbers.

I'm not sure what you mean? It is true that the two disagree on ammo slot (no others though) though, KLS changed that a while ago. If you are using stock EQEmu code then the DB change will be the same regardless of what DB you're using.

If any custom servers changed the slot numbers in their code then that it isn't our concern to support them because we're not mind readers and don't know what they changed :P If they changed their code and deviated from the core code, then it's their responsibility to make the required DB changes, not ours.

**gaeorn** · #6 06-10-2009, 02:15 PM

Cavedude, it appears what I have been writing in here is not coming across as intended to you. I've been kinda thrown off by your last couple of replies since they didn't seem to have much to do with what I was trying to say. I guess my replies appeared the same way to you. As best I can tell, it appears you were taking each of my replies on their own, rather than being an attempt to clarify one of my earlier replies, which is how the last few were intended. Maybe I should have been more specific in my replies.

In any case, I believe I understand and agree with everything you have said. I just didn't seem to be able to get that across.

This is starting to feel like the Abbott and Costello "Who's on first?" routine, lol.

**cavedude** · #7 06-10-2009, 02:27 PM

I know! But, all I want to know is who's on first?!?!?!

**gaeorn** · #8 06-10-2009, 02:32 PM

Thats what I was asking...