Changes between Version 1 and Version 2 of Ticket #13432, comment 7
- Timestamp:
- 05/24/22 04:10:08 (2 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
Ticket #13432, comment 7
v1 v2 7 7 The solution is to add back the SaveType-test (by calling isAutosave()), except this time it should be called after the name-test (i.e. after hasAutosaveName()). 8 8 9 Probably doesn’t matter with the Options dialog because all tests have to be completed, but testing for the in-game dialog need only continue until one of the tests returns true (which requires tests to be completed in a logical order).9 The order probably doesn’t matter with the Options dialog because all tests have to be completed, but testing for the in-game dialog need only continue until one of the tests returns true (which requires tests to be completed in a logical order). 10 10 11 11 Following this change, hasAutosaveName() will continue to test the dummy autosave, but if it returns false, it will be offset by isAutosave() returning true (if autosaving is enabled), eliminating it from any possible inclusion in either dialog. 12 12 13 The overall effect of this is that the dummy autosave is ignored when autosaving, regardless of its name, as it should be. It has no adverse effect on user saves as they always return a SaveType of false.13 The overall effect of this is that the dummy autosave is ignored when autosaving, regardless of its name, as it should be. It has no adverse effect on user saves as they always return a SaveType-test result of false. 14 14 15 15 There’s only one change required for each dialog, and the location and proposed change for each are as follows: … … 28 28 It’s a pretty trivial fix by your standards, but I haven’t been able to test this, so if you agree with what I’ve proposed, and can find the time, please consider implementing it as a viable solution. 29 29 30 Thanks for your interest.30 Hope this helps, and thanks for clarifying things.
