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.

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

setDebugViewActive should have a better integration with the debug screen #1490

Open
DNL291 opened this issue Jun 2, 2020 · 3 comments
Open
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@DNL291
Copy link
Member

DNL291 commented Jun 2, 2020

Describe the solution you'd like

Add the same values of debugscript to setDebugViewActive function.
So, the new syntax would be: setDebugViewActive( bool [, int mode] )

Additional context

There is also a conflict between the debug view openned via debugscript and the one with the function. If (with debug disabled) you use setDebugViewActive( true ) and then debugscript 0, it will not recognize that you already have it enabled.
Probably because this function was done in a very simple way, and it could be more complete.

@DNL291 DNL291 added the enhancement New feature or request label Jun 2, 2020
@DNL291
Copy link
Member Author

DNL291 commented Jun 11, 2020

Just noticed that we already have setPlayerScriptDebugLevel server-side.
So, I don't know if the client-side function needs this new argument... Anyways, one bug related to it still remains, where I mention in 'Additional context'.

@Pirulax
Copy link
Contributor

Pirulax commented Jun 22, 2020

setDebugViewActive's client-side value isn't synced to the server. And I presume debugscript command is server-side.

Edit: it is server-side: CConsoleCommands.cpp:1225

@Pirulax
Copy link
Contributor

Pirulax commented Jun 22, 2020

One cheap and hacked solution would be to send a packet regardless of the current server-side state

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants