Function: isVehicleWheelCollided

[ZReC]

This function detect if car wheel is on air or in collision.

Example:
isVehicleWheelCollided ( theVehicle, "rear_left" )
or
isVehicleWheelCollided ( theVehicle, 1 )
or
theVehicle.isWheelCollided ( "front_right" )

The wheels are:

"front_left" or 0
"rear_left" or 1
"front_right" or 2
"rear_right" or 3

Bikes only have front / rear left wheel .

If someone has a better name for the function please comment 👍

[CrosRoad95]

Next can you add function getVehicleWheelContactMaterial(vehicle,wheel) it can be used for detect if player drive over grass

[CrosRoad95]

Next can you add function getVehicleWheelContactMaterial(vehicle,wheel) it can be used for detect if player drive over grass

[qaisjp]

I suggest the function is called doesVehicleWheelCollide or getVehicleWheelCollide.

Also, perhaps we should instead only support text arguments or number arguments. I lean towards only supporting text arguments. The simpler and easier to understand, the better. This is up for discussion.

[qaisjp]

I suggest the function is called doesVehicleWheelCollide or getVehicleWheelCollide.

Also, perhaps we should instead only support text arguments or number arguments. I lean towards only supporting text arguments. The simpler and easier to understand, the better. This is up for discussion.

[Jusonex]

Could you please refactor CVehicleSA::IsWheelCollided to use the appropriate member attributes of CVehicleSAInterface instead of manual offset calculations.

E.g.:

bool CVehicleSA::IsWheelCollided(std::uint8_t wheelPosition) // eWheelPosition might also be better here
{
  CVehicleSAInterface* vehicle = GetInterface();
  switch (vehicle->wheelType) // or whatever this is exactly
  {
  case 0:
    if (wheelPosition < 4)
      return vehicle->wheelCollisionState[wheelPosition] == 4.0f;
  // ...
}

[Jusonex]

Could you please refactor CVehicleSA::IsWheelCollided to use the appropriate member attributes of CVehicleSAInterface instead of manual offset calculations.

E.g.:

bool CVehicleSA::IsWheelCollided(std::uint8_t wheelPosition) // eWheelPosition might also be better here
{
  CVehicleSAInterface* vehicle = GetInterface();
  switch (vehicle->wheelType) // or whatever this is exactly
  {
  case 0:
    if (wheelPosition < 4)
      return vehicle->wheelCollisionState[wheelPosition] == 4.0f;
  // ...
}

[ZReC]

Not a bad idea, I'll do my best.

[ZReC]

Not a bad idea, I'll do my best.

[CrosRoad95]

what if vehicle dont have 4 wheel? ex 3 ( dodo ) or motorbike ?

[CrosRoad95]

what if vehicle dont have 4 wheel? ex 3 ( dodo ) or motorbike ?

[ZReC]

In vehicles of 3 wheels are combined 2 in 1, in motorbikes only the left

[ZReC]

In vehicles of 3 wheels are combined 2 in 1, in motorbikes only the left

[ZReC]

Jusonex, I have problems implementing the code to CVehicleSAInterface, it turns out that from offset 0x5A0 (1440 decimal) CVehicleSAInterface should give rise to a class more specific of the type of vehicle in particular (CAutomobile, CBike, CHeli, CTrain, CPlane) But instead the class extends with variables of different types of vehicles as of trains:

//1440
unsigned char m_ucTrackNodeID;  // Current node on train tracks

In my opinion would have to be rewritten this sector of the code, to make it more structured and manageable, meanwhile could graft the code of the collision but would not be the most appropriate.
What do you think?

Note: the offset 0x590 if it is the vehicle type, type uint8_t and its values correspond to:
0 = car - plane | 5 = boat | 6 = train | 9 = bike

[ZReC]

Jusonex, I have problems implementing the code to CVehicleSAInterface, it turns out that from offset 0x5A0 (1440 decimal) CVehicleSAInterface should give rise to a class more specific of the type of vehicle in particular (CAutomobile, CBike, CHeli, CTrain, CPlane) But instead the class extends with variables of different types of vehicles as of trains:

//1440
unsigned char m_ucTrackNodeID;  // Current node on train tracks

In my opinion would have to be rewritten this sector of the code, to make it more structured and manageable, meanwhile could graft the code of the collision but would not be the most appropriate.
What do you think?

Note: the offset 0x590 if it is the vehicle type, type uint8_t and its values correspond to:
0 = car - plane | 5 = boat | 6 = train | 9 = bike

[Jusonex]

In my opinion would have to be rewritten this sector of the code, to make it more structured and manageable

Yes, that's the way to go - not as a part of this PR though.

I'd say update as much as possible (e.g. 0x590) and leave the rest as it is.

[Jusonex]

In my opinion would have to be rewritten this sector of the code, to make it more structured and manageable

Yes, that's the way to go - not as a part of this PR though.

I'd say update as much as possible (e.g. 0x590) and leave the rest as it is.

[ZReC]

Updated. Excuse me for the lack of activity, studies are killing me 😆

[ZReC]

Updated. Excuse me for the lack of activity, studies are killing me 😆