Cutscene Mini-Post

ID:54442
 
Feb 20 2009, 2:56 pm (Edited on Feb 20 2009, 3:03 pm)
Post your thoughts and whatnot here!


P.S. YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO SPAM THE VERB! If you get a runtime error it's not the proc but the verb >.>. And if it's that hard to avoid then I'll fix it.
Feb 20 2009, 3:02 pm
I didnt understand it but in a weird way it was funny
Feb 20 2009, 3:11 pm
looooooooooooooooool
Feb 20 2009, 4:46 pm
?
Feb 26 2009, 1:41 pm
It has usr abuse in it. Go fix it. It also seems rather repetitive, and I can't tell whether that's the justified kind of repetitive or not.
Feb 26 2009, 2:11 pm
Jeff8500 wrote:
It has usr abuse in it. Go fix it. It also seems rather repetitive, and I can't tell whether that's the justified kind of repetitive or not.

What is usr abuse...?
Feb 26 2009, 4:02 pm
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
It has usr abuse in it. Go fix it. It also seems rather repetitive, and I can't tell whether that's the justified kind of repetitive or not.

What is usr abuse...?

Using usr in a proc.
Feb 26 2009, 5:24 pm
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
It has usr abuse in it. Go fix it. It also seems rather repetitive, and I can't tell whether that's the justified kind of repetitive or not.

What is usr abuse...?

Using usr in a proc.


I checked it...and I don't see it in the proc...
Feb 26 2009, 5:24 pm
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
It has usr abuse in it. Go fix it. It also seems rather repetitive, and I can't tell whether that's the justified kind of repetitive or not.

What is usr abuse...?

Using usr in a proc.


I checked it...and I don't see it in the proc...

Then you don't know what a proc is. Look at Login().
Feb 26 2009, 5:25 pm
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
It has usr abuse in it. Go fix it. It also seems rather repetitive, and I can't tell whether that's the justified kind of repetitive or not.

What is usr abuse...?

Using usr in a proc.


I checked it...and I don't see it in the proc...

Then you don't know what a proc is. Look at Login().

I thought you meant the C_Scene proc...what else would you rather...it's not like it doesn't work. It works completely. So what's wrong with it >.>?
Feb 26 2009, 5:27 pm
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
It has usr abuse in it. Go fix it. It also seems rather repetitive, and I can't tell whether that's the justified kind of repetitive or not.

What is usr abuse...?

Using usr in a proc.


I checked it...and I don't see it in the proc...

Then you don't know what a proc is. Look at Login().

I thought you meant the C_Scene proc...what else would you rather...it's not like it doesn't work. It works completely. So what's wrong with it >.>?

You used usr in a proc, which is the equivalent of having unprotected sex.
Feb 26 2009, 5:28 pm
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
It has usr abuse in it. Go fix it. It also seems rather repetitive, and I can't tell whether that's the justified kind of repetitive or not.

What is usr abuse...?

Using usr in a proc.


I checked it...and I don't see it in the proc...

Then you don't know what a proc is. Look at Login().

I thought you meant the C_Scene proc...what else would you rather...it's not like it doesn't work. It works completely. So what's wrong with it >.>?

You used usr in a proc, which is the equivalent of having unprotected sex.

...your point is? I don't see the need to fix usr abuse if it doesn't change anything but some letters, and the fact that you yourself could just edit them for your own convenience since you have the programming right in front of you.
Feb 26 2009, 5:30 pm
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
It has usr abuse in it. Go fix it. It also seems rather repetitive, and I can't tell whether that's the justified kind of repetitive or not.

What is usr abuse...?

Using usr in a proc.


I checked it...and I don't see it in the proc...

Then you don't know what a proc is. Look at Login().

I thought you meant the C_Scene proc...what else would you rather...it's not like it doesn't work. It works completely. So what's wrong with it >.>?

You used usr in a proc, which is the equivalent of having unprotected sex.

...your point is? I don't see the need to fix usr abuse if it doesn't change anything but some letters, and the fact that you yourself could just edit them for your own convenience since you have the programming right in front of you.

If you didn't get the analogy, then your peers haven't taught you anything :P. Using usr may be OK/good in the short term, but eventually it can cause your code to completely break down (Edit: equivalent of herpes). Also, many people expect their libraries plug and play, especially if the come from a language like C++ in which you can use precompiled libraries.
Feb 26 2009, 5:34 pm
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
It has usr abuse in it. Go fix it. It also seems rather repetitive, and I can't tell whether that's the justified kind of repetitive or not.

What is usr abuse...?

Using usr in a proc.


I checked it...and I don't see it in the proc...

Then you don't know what a proc is. Look at Login().

I thought you meant the C_Scene proc...what else would you rather...it's not like it doesn't work. It works completely. So what's wrong with it >.>?

You used usr in a proc, which is the equivalent of having unprotected sex.

...your point is? I don't see the need to fix usr abuse if it doesn't change anything but some letters, and the fact that you yourself could just edit them for your own convenience since you have the programming right in front of you.

If you didn't get the analogy, then your peers haven't taught you anything :P. Using usr may be OK/good in the short term, but eventually it can cause your code to completely break down (Edit: equivalent of herpes). Also, many people expect their libraries plug and play, especially if the come from a language like C++ in which you can use precompiled libraries.

But Login() isn't even necessary. In fact you should remove it, so why fix a snippet that will most likely be removed or be no harm...?
Feb 26 2009, 5:38 pm
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
It has usr abuse in it. Go fix it. It also seems rather repetitive, and I can't tell whether that's the justified kind of repetitive or not.

What is usr abuse...?

Using usr in a proc.


I checked it...and I don't see it in the proc...

Then you don't know what a proc is. Look at Login().

I thought you meant the C_Scene proc...what else would you rather...it's not like it doesn't work. It works completely. So what's wrong with it >.>?

You used usr in a proc, which is the equivalent of having unprotected sex.

...your point is? I don't see the need to fix usr abuse if it doesn't change anything but some letters, and the fact that you yourself could just edit them for your own convenience since you have the programming right in front of you.

If you didn't get the analogy, then your peers haven't taught you anything :P. Using usr may be OK/good in the short term, but eventually it can cause your code to completely break down (Edit: equivalent of herpes). Also, many people expect their libraries plug and play, especially if the come from a language like C++ in which you can use precompiled libraries.

But Login() isn't even necessary. In fact you should remove it, so why fix a snippet that will most likely be removed or be no harm...?

Because it's in the library itself, not a DM demo file. Besides, it's improper to teach others if you're teaching them improperly; you're showing them usr is Ok in procs. It's never Ok in procs, and it shouldn't be there.
Feb 26 2009, 5:42 pm
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
Choka wrote:
Jeff8500 wrote:
It has usr abuse in it. Go fix it. It also seems rather repetitive, and I can't tell whether that's the justified kind of repetitive or not.

What is usr abuse...?

Using usr in a proc.


I checked it...and I don't see it in the proc...

Then you don't know what a proc is. Look at Login().

I thought you meant the C_Scene proc...what else would you rather...it's not like it doesn't work. It works completely. So what's wrong with it >.>?

You used usr in a proc, which is the equivalent of having unprotected sex.

...your point is? I don't see the need to fix usr abuse if it doesn't change anything but some letters, and the fact that you yourself could just edit them for your own convenience since you have the programming right in front of you.

If you didn't get the analogy, then your peers haven't taught you anything :P. Using usr may be OK/good in the short term, but eventually it can cause your code to completely break down (Edit: equivalent of herpes). Also, many people expect their libraries plug and play, especially if the come from a language like C++ in which you can use precompiled libraries.

But Login() isn't even necessary. In fact you should remove it, so why fix a snippet that will most likely be removed or be no harm...?

Because it's in the library itself, not a DM demo file. Besides, it's improper to teach others if you're teaching them improperly; you're showing them usr is Ok in procs. It's never Ok in procs, and it shouldn't be there.

Errr...whatever..I'm just going to...go...do something...besides...be outwitted by you?
Feb 26 2009, 5:57 pm
For future reference please refrain from spamming my blog-posts with quotesw...I know it's not intentional but definitely avoidable.