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

Extending the ColShape class with point checking functionality #195

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jul 1, 2018

Conversation

Projects
9 participants
@tederis
Contributor

tederis commented May 16, 2018

This commit brings a function isInsideColShape(colshape theColShape, float x, float y, float z) that checks if a 3D point is inside a colshape or not.

@botder botder added the enhancement label May 16, 2018

@CrosRoad95

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@CrosRoad95

CrosRoad95 May 17, 2018

Contributor

Cool, you should add option to disable collision detection ( for specified colshape or for every colshape setColshapeDetectionEnabled(bool enable) will turn on/off collision detection ). And i think there is missing interior and dimension argument.

Contributor

CrosRoad95 commented May 17, 2018

Cool, you should add option to disable collision detection ( for specified colshape or for every colshape setColshapeDetectionEnabled(bool enable) will turn on/off collision detection ). And i think there is missing interior and dimension argument.

@tederis

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tederis

tederis May 18, 2018

Contributor

I will add the interior and dimension arguments. But the enabling option is some more difficult because there is new function necessity. The function setElementEnabled(element theElement, bool enabled) is can be more usefull(and more common) for not only colshape purposes, but also it can be a excessively radical novation that the MTA Team will not approve. I'll think about it.

Contributor

tederis commented May 18, 2018

I will add the interior and dimension arguments. But the enabling option is some more difficult because there is new function necessity. The function setElementEnabled(element theElement, bool enabled) is can be more usefull(and more common) for not only colshape purposes, but also it can be a excessively radical novation that the MTA Team will not approve. I'll think about it.

@pawel-miczka

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pawel-miczka

pawel-miczka May 21, 2018

I'm not sure but is there any alternative to make this working today? Something like creating empty element (via createElement) on position x,y,z and use isElementWithinColshape and after that destroy created element.

pawel-miczka commented May 21, 2018

I'm not sure but is there any alternative to make this working today? Something like creating empty element (via createElement) on position x,y,z and use isElementWithinColshape and after that destroy created element.

@4O4

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@4O4

4O4 May 21, 2018

Contributor
Contributor

4O4 commented May 21, 2018

@WhileAGO

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@WhileAGO

WhileAGO May 24, 2018

I'm creating something which if a object been placed on the map but not inside the ColShape it will get Auto-removed But as they said to me you can't check a static object inside a ColShape and this function isInsideColShape(colshape theColShape, float x, float y, float z) will really help to many code writers.

WhileAGO commented May 24, 2018

I'm creating something which if a object been placed on the map but not inside the ColShape it will get Auto-removed But as they said to me you can't check a static object inside a ColShape and this function isInsideColShape(colshape theColShape, float x, float y, float z) will really help to many code writers.

@Dezash

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Dezash

Dezash May 24, 2018

Contributor

@CrosRoad95 this can be easily done using the currently available functions. This pull request is good the way it is now.

Contributor

Dezash commented May 24, 2018

@CrosRoad95 this can be easily done using the currently available functions. This pull request is good the way it is now.

@qaisjp qaisjp merged commit 3ed17df into multitheftauto:master Jul 1, 2018

2 checks passed

continuous-integration/appveyor/pr AppVeyor build succeeded
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details

qaisjp referenced this pull request Jul 14, 2018

@patrikjuvonen patrikjuvonen added this to In progress in release/v1.5.6 via automation Aug 7, 2018

@patrikjuvonen patrikjuvonen added this to the 1.5.6 milestone Aug 7, 2018

@patrikjuvonen patrikjuvonen moved this from In progress to Done in release/v1.5.6 Aug 7, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment