Strongly considering removal of all EQTypes besides 9999

Lax · Post by **Lax** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 12:27 am

Simply put, the list is going to be gigantic. And in order to add new stuff, it has to be recompiled. The problem with a gigantic list is this is an array not a hash table. So for every label to update, it's going through each and every EQType in our list. These labels are getting update every time the UI is drawn.

We could change it to be a much larger array and access directly, but then you still need to recompile to add anything new, and you have to watch other peoples toes.

I really, really want to propose we drop the list and use the TooltipReference. It suits everyone, no compiling involved, you don't have to worry about running over someones numbers, you don't have to go through a list to find a string because it's stored in the label's window already.

If someone has a compelling reason we should keep the list please explain, cause from my point of view it's going to be an amoebic mass. If we have such a list at all, it should be kept very small and limited. Thoughts?

Teh_ish · Post by **Teh_ish** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 12:41 am

As I suggested in the other thread, let's at least keep the ones we have implemented. I think they sort of form the core set of what everyone could use. Don't add any more, but don't dump the ones in the listat this point(not including the buff stuff)

Lax · Post by **Lax** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 12:44 am

I left it alone in latest CVS, but put a note above it to keep the list limited and recommend TooltipReference

FreQuency · Post by **FreQuency** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 1:11 am

I think we should keep a small list with few updates as new useful/meaningful info comes along, the ones we have in now are great and i've already started ripping apart my UI but i think it would be nice to add the buff info in there

Lax · Post by **Lax** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 1:18 am

Well, with 41 different EQTypes for the buff info alone it's a little much. Take a look at the windows I made, use

Code: Select all

<EQType>9999</EQType>
<TooltipReference>$char(buff,1,durationsecs)</TooltipReference>

etc, instead of having to remember or keep track of the EQTypes.

wassup · Post by **wassup** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 1:21 am

I'm not an XML guru so I'm not understanding the use of the tooltypes.

I do understand the use of the id's.

Lax · Post by **Lax** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 1:25 am

The tooltip is just something that holds a string in all the windows for us to exploit. EQType 9999 just says hey use the string from TooltipReference, parse it, and display the parsed output. :)

wassup · Post by **wassup** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 1:40 am

How would you put multiple tooltips in is what I am saying I guess.

And how do you position them?

Nevermind... I just looked at your buff window in the UI section.

Yeah, I would just use tooltypes... forget the individual id's.

Lax · Post by **Lax** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 1:42 am

It's just a property of the label, just like EQType is.

one pseudo-label..

Code: Select all

<Label>
 <EQType>9999</EQType>
 <TooltipReference>$target(id)</TooltipReference>
</Label>

another

Code: Select all

<Label>
 <EQType>9999</EQType>
 <TooltipReference>$target(class)</TooltipReference>
</Label>

Basically you just plop it in right under the EQType for your label and dont worry about it

FreQuency · Post by **FreQuency** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 1:45 am

I know what your saying Lax but after we have a decent list complete it would need little work or am i assuming very wrong, only reference list i see in source is in EQLib_hooks which if that is only place it does not seem to be too much of a burden, as i don't see how a patch could update anything to break our current list.
Please feel free to correct me if i am wrong

Lax · Post by **Lax** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 1:58 am

I'm not saying a patch will break the list (note: if you were to use a number in your copy, and then we cvs'd a different value to that same number, this would break your ui), I'm saying its inefficient. It's taking extra steps to arrive at the same result that using EQType 9999 and a TooltipReference is doing, potentially hundreds or thousands of extra steps, for every single one of our custom UI labels.

I'm saying the list needs to be kept short, not used with reckless abandon. The UI updates extremely fast, and we should try to keep this sleek. It's not a once in a while thing like superwho, this is being done the entire time whether you give it a command or not.

I'm also saying that having hundreds of EQTypes will be hard for anyone to keep track of when working on their UI. If I was to use the EQTypes directly in my buff window mod, I wouldn't know wtf was going on. I use the Tooltip with the macro string to be parsed right there and I know exactly what I'm looking at.

Sharp of Fairlight · Post by **Sharp of Fairlight** » Tue Nov 11, 2003 7:12 am

I'm with Lax here.

1. All these tags has been available for only a few days, the "damage" done can't be much.
2. The UI-files will be much cleaner and "selfdocumenting" with only the 9999.
3. Implementing new things to show in the UIs will be zero work.

But if you gonna remove them do it ASAP if so, before too many UIs pops up.

pooz · Post by **pooz** » Tue Nov 11, 2003 11:15 am

I'm in favor of removing them and using only the ToolTipReference.

As Lax said, having that list is just asking for bloat. If people want to slow down their own UI's let em, but for those of us not customizing our UI's we'd rather not have it slowing down MQ.

Lax · Post by **Lax** » Tue Nov 11, 2003 11:26 am

I think it's going to be left how it is currently, no new EQTypes just the short list already existing. Just be sure to use only EQType 9999 along with tooltipreference if you want your UI to be fast even if someone adds hundreds of EQTypes to their list.

Thanks for your comments, no more necessary :)

xyilla · Post by **xyilla** » Wed Oct 08, 2025 11:10 pm

Ласи