Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

transfer release notes for v12.0P1 to #1

Closed
erendrake opened this issue Mar 9, 2014 · 2 comments
Closed

transfer release notes for v12.0P1 to #1

erendrake opened this issue Mar 9, 2014 · 2 comments
Assignees
@marianoapp
Labels
discussion Not necessarily a problem - Using a Github issue to have a public discussion

Comments

@erendrake
Copy link
Member

I was about to build a release to share with everyone, then i realized i don't really know about all of the changes additions you made other than the major parser rewrite.

ill try to dig through the git log and find what i can
@marianoapp
Copy link
Contributor

From the user point of view there are not many things that have changed, perhaps the more important are:

  • There's no built-in editor, the "edit" command is parsed but it doesn't do anything
  • There's a config SpecialValue that can be used to control how some of the mod features work, like setting the execution speed, the integration with RT2 and starting from the archive volume.
  • The terminal screen can be scrolled using PageUp and PageDown
  • Negative numbers/expressions can be written starting with a minus sign, so no more "0-..."

I think that would be all

@erendrake
Copy link
Member Author

Good, Thank you for all of your hard work on that merge. Ill get a release up today.

@SolarLiner SolarLiner mentioned this issue May 19, 2014
Closed
@erendrake erendrake mentioned this issue May 23, 2014
Closed
erendrake pushed a commit that referenced this issue Dec 23, 2014
@theodoregoetz
Merge pull request #1 from KSP-KOS/master
dea64f3 
Master
erendrake pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jan 5, 2015
@SirDiazo
Merge pull request #1 from erendrake/agx_first
36986da 
Merging Binding changes.
@pdbogen pdbogen mentioned this issue Jan 5, 2015
Open
@Dunbaratu Dunbaratu mentioned this issue Jan 15, 2015
Closed
Dunbaratu pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 4, 2015
@ZiwKerman
Merge pull request #1 from KSP-KOS/develop
e598574 
Pulling development branch updates
@erendrake erendrake mentioned this issue Apr 14, 2015
Closed
erendrake pushed a commit that referenced this issue Apr 15, 2015
@abenkovskii
Merge pull request #1 from KSP-KOS/develop
a2b631e 
Pulling development branch updates
erendrake pushed a commit that referenced this issue May 23, 2015
@abenkovskii
file system fix #1 [fix]
6b42138
@erendrake erendrake mentioned this issue Jun 27, 2015
Closed
erendrake pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jun 27, 2015
@tomekpiotrowski
Merge pull request #1 from hvacengi/pr-1065-revisions
5f7c0ab 
PR 1065 revisions
gisikw pushed a commit to gisikw/KOS that referenced this issue Feb 15, 2016
@pgodd
Merge pull request KSP-KOS#1 from hvacengi/pgodd-new_part_kal9000
0a11828 
Re-write kOSLightModule
hvacengi pushed a commit that referenced this issue Feb 15, 2016
@AlchemistCH
Merge pull request #1 from hvacengi/review-1249-engines
a37a034 
Review 1249 engines
Dunbaratu pushed a commit that referenced this issue Feb 29, 2016
@pgodd
Merge pull request #1 from pgodd/artworkCleanup
f6ec0e1 
Artwork source files cleanup and additions
@adolfgatonegro adolfgatonegro mentioned this issue Mar 6, 2016
Open
@dewiniaid dewiniaid mentioned this issue Jul 3, 2016
Open
Dunbaratu pushed a commit that referenced this issue Apr 6, 2018
@PiezPiedPy
Merge pull request #1 from Dunbaratu/trajectories_both_versions
37fa1e6 
Trajectories both versions
erendrake pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jul 27, 2018
@Dunbaratu
Found cause of lag: lock throttle in loop.
2a6021e 
Change #1:

AddTrigger opcode will now treat steering
lock triggers as the same if they come from the same
point in the program, like they're supposed to (and
like they used to do).

My pilot.ks program was bogging down very very
slowly, to about 3 FPS with the new interrupt
priority code.  I found the cause:

When a program did ``lock throttle`` in a loop,
like so:

```
until false {
  lock throttle to 1.
  wait 0.
}
```

Then each time the "lock throttle" statement was visited,
it would insert a NEW trigger for it because it failed to
recognize that the previous one was already pending in the
trigger list.  (The Equals() test was calling it a new
trigger, because it was getting a new instance ID in the
OpcodeTrigger.Execute() logic.  Because it wasn't "Equal"
to the existing one, the uniqueness test for inserting a
trigger failed to deny the insertion.)

Therefore after the program runs a while instead of having
like 1 throttle trigger there were hundreds of them, clogging
the execution, and making the trigger logic itself rather slow
(doing sequential walks through the trigger lists between each
opcode with hundreds of triggers in the list instead of typically
about 10-ish like there should be in a typical program).

Change #2:

The new logic on how triggers move from the active list to the
callstack means they no longer execute in reverse order because
they don't all get stacked up at once (instead they move over one
at a time, waiting for the prev one to finish, unless a higher
priority one is there that is supposed to stack on top).  What this
means is that when moving from the trigger list to the stack, it
shouldn't be doing so in reverse order like it used to.
Dunbaratu pushed a commit that referenced this issue Feb 1, 2019
@StoneBlue
Merge pull request #1 from HebaruSan/delete-mbms
ecf6864 
Delete MBM files
Dunbaratu pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jun 16, 2019
@jonnyboyC
Merge pull request #1 from KSP-KOS/develop
42664d9 
Update from upstream
Dunbaratu pushed a commit that referenced this issue Nov 1, 2019
Merge pull request #1 from KSP-KOS/develop
4ca2dcb 
Update to latest
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@marianoapp marianoapp

Labels
discussion Not necessarily a problem - Using a Github issue to have a public discussion
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@erendrake @marianoapp