I can already see how that could be coded, but I'm not going to actually do it unless fronobulax (or someone else that wants to commit the change) says they would like it that way to add. At the very least I would need a good preference name.
Feature - Implemented Set default amount to 1 in the input box for the quantity of items to create
- Thread starter slyz
- Start date
I can already see how that could be coded, but I'm not going to actually do it unless fronobulax (or someone else that wants to commit the change) says they would like it that way to add. At the very least I would need a good preference name.
Bale
Minion
Not really. I have a difference of opinion between "I like this for my personal use" and "I think this should be standard on mafia". It's nice to build my own.
This guy gets me. Can I see a diff file of your personal mafia fixes? I might want some of your goodiness.
Whoa! Isn't this a bit to fiddly and minor to be worth adding yet another preference to the huge list of preferences? It's cluttery enough already!
Theraze
Active member
Another possibility would be a new section/board for diffs/patches that won't be implemented into the main code... items like this could live there to be available for those who want them, without needing to peel through (as many) years of bug notes. The obvious problem is that many of these either become irrelevant or actually rolled into full code, but...
Bale
Minion
To apply a patch you'd have to compile your own build from source.
Step-by-step info about that HERE. That page could use a bit of editing to improve user-friendliness, but it is pretty helpful.
Step-by-step info about that HERE. That page could use a bit of editing to improve user-friendliness, but it is pretty helpful.
Last edited:
Theraze
Active member
Also, there's an article on Creating a Patch... applying one isn't much harder. Basically, after it's all together, you right click the folder, choose 'Apply a Patch', give it the file, it opens up a few windows including one with the patch name, right-click on the patch name and tell it to apply, and you're done...
I have (perhaps undeserved and definitely underused) commit access to the source tree. An exercise for the reader is to find my SourceForge ID 
When a change is proposed, someone else does the work and either I like the idea or I don't care but several other people do, I am willing to inspect the change and commit it. However that path is fraught with peril if I my decision to commit is questioned by Veracity, Jason or any of the more vocal posters here. So I will err on the side of caution and favor simplicity when I am offering my commit access on behalf of someone elses work.
All that said, the consensus that I am seeing develop is that this change, as it stands, is not appropriate for the main line. The people who seem to be most interested in it also seem comfortable maintaining private versions of mafia.
That said, I do think there is an opportunity for someone who wants to write a BlowUpBoxen script that doesn't buy any more than is needed to blow up the box and I think there is an opportunity for people who actually modify the source code to share their "private changes" and possibly get community support for mainlining them. Maybe Veracity's developer forum might be a better host since the vast majority of people invited there were building code from source.
When a change is proposed, someone else does the work and either I like the idea or I don't care but several other people do, I am willing to inspect the change and commit it. However that path is fraught with peril if I my decision to commit is questioned by Veracity, Jason or any of the more vocal posters here. So I will err on the side of caution and favor simplicity when I am offering my commit access on behalf of someone elses work.All that said, the consensus that I am seeing develop is that this change, as it stands, is not appropriate for the main line. The people who seem to be most interested in it also seem comfortable maintaining private versions of mafia.
That said, I do think there is an opportunity for someone who wants to write a BlowUpBoxen script that doesn't buy any more than is needed to blow up the box and I think there is an opportunity for people who actually modify the source code to share their "private changes" and possibly get community support for mainlining them. Maybe Veracity's developer forum might be a better host since the vast majority of people invited there were building code from source.
I think the issue is that there is more potential for user error if the default amount to craft is the maximum. The fact that people find this out when they want to blow their servants is more anecdotal.
Lost's patch that displays the maximum amount possible in the input box should considerably reduce the risk of user error. The only drawback I see is the inconsistency with the default amount of the "enqueue" button of the consumption helper. Even there, the default is not the maximum creatable amount, since the default amount is limited by consumption.
Lost's patch that displays the maximum amount possible in the input box should considerably reduce the risk of user error. The only drawback I see is the inconsistency with the default amount of the "enqueue" button of the consumption helper. Even there, the default is not the maximum creatable amount, since the default amount is limited by consumption.
Many of them revolve around chat, including changes to handle connecting two clan chats -- I'm not sure they are much use to anyone beyond me! Certainly for anyone with knowledge of programming in python (which is not me) pykol would be much better suited to the task. The only main ones I can think of with a wider implementation are an ASH function to determine who is in your clan chat, since it was easier to edit the main code than write it in ASH, and an overhaul in progress of the clan manager. The clan manager isn't finished yet (and is mainly for folk with admin/leadership responsibilities), but I'm happy to share when it's done.
I would agree with that. I also think slyz is spot on. Lost's patch is a good compromise, sod the inconsistency
Re a new board -- could be interesting. I don't think it would be particularly active, but it might be nice to see what sort of changes people want to see. I think there are some of us who enjoy mini projects and this could be a way to showcase them. In addition, would it be possible to use that board to establish some kind of KoLmafia Janitors (rather like Linux's Kernel Janitors project) where more routine clean up projects or changes could be asked for by the developers if they don't have the time or the desire to work on them. I'm sure there are some of us out there who would quite enjoy those sorts of things.
Theraze
Active member
Seems like it shouldn't be nearly as difficult to write a blow up boxen script now that the client tracks usage... right? Could just pull that variable, and buy/craft for that many.
Actually, that brings up a different potential change... this would likely be a preference choice thing, but...
Could have a setting for don't craft using adventures. Craftable numbers, if this option is set, would be based on how many boxen turns are left (as long as it's not set to repair them) as well as how much money/supplies are available. Would also help people not screw up runs when they think they still have boxen available, but they're either broken or haven't gotten this ascension...
Actually, that brings up a different potential change... this would likely be a preference choice thing, but...
Could have a setting for don't craft using adventures. Craftable numbers, if this option is set, would be based on how many boxen turns are left (as long as it's not set to repair them) as well as how much money/supplies are available. Would also help people not screw up runs when they think they still have boxen available, but they're either broken or haven't gotten this ascension...
There are already a couple of settings -- the first is "require in-a-boxes", the second is "repair on explosion". Check the former, uncheck the latter - mafia will go till it explodes and no further. The issue is that the input box gives the maximum possible (including meat on hand) which may be considerably more than the box could take. What it sounds like you are suggesting is that (instead of an extra preference) mafia uses the amount of times you have used the boxen to predict uses left. However, this makes numbers meaningless for folks who adventure outside of mafia.
Lost's solution is to provide the "maximum" amount in the input box, but default to 1. This seems preferable to me.
Lost's solution is to provide the "maximum" amount in the input box, but default to 1. This seems preferable to me.
Theraze
Active member
Ah... yeah, I suppose my suggestion then would have been to have it that if require in-a-box is checked, and repair on explosion is not, then the maximum creatable count is actually based on that. If people craft both inside and outside Kolmafia, they'll still get a slightly elevated count... but in the "under 100" grouping, not in the "I just made 5000 what?!" group. Because based on their settings, that really is the maximum possible creatable count...
I only see a handful of people submitting code to Mafia, and I think only Jason and Veracity add significant features. It would be nice to see people come up with more than suggestions/feature request, and have more people actually contribute to Mafia's code.
And of course, I'm sure a lot of the tedious compilation and formatting of data like the different familiars' effects in the Crown of Thrones could be done by the community.
In the case of campground servants, there's the requireBoxServants preference already. In the case of other types of crafting, I don't really see what a "don't craft using adventures" would bring.
Theraze
Active member
Yeah, Grotfang pointed that out... but then I made a suggestion following that regarding maximum based on preferences as well as meat/supply. Basically, if you have it set to require boxen, and not repair, don't allow maximum suggestion to be higher than your boxen turns (that Kolmafia knows about) remaining. If you have 10 uses remaining and repair is off, don't suggest more than 10 craftable, because it won't be until you manually repair or change your preferences...
jasonharper
Developer
There's a variance of about 20 in the lifespan of a box servant - which number will you use? I foresee problems no matter what: at one end, you're wasting meat on buying ingredients that won't be needed, and at the other end, you're forcing the player to do creations one at a time.
All of this stuff about matching the number with how many box-crafts you have left has nothing to do with the case of creating things that don't use box servants to begin with.
I really don't like the idea of not including the change of pre-filling the field with 1 because of inconsistency with the food/booze/spleen section. I don't even think most people will notice, and I think most of the people that will spend all of their meat on stuff for crafting will probably never read this forum to find a script, at least not before spending all of their meat.
I really don't like the idea of not including the change of pre-filling the field with 1 because of inconsistency with the food/booze/spleen section. I don't even think most people will notice, and I think most of the people that will spend all of their meat on stuff for crafting will probably never read this forum to find a script, at least not before spending all of their meat.
Bale
Minion
Since trying this I've noticed that it is inconsistent with many other sections of mafia's interface. It's not just the consumption section. In my eyes, inconsistency is bad unless the user is well aware of it and there's a good reason. If box explosions are really a problem, maybe I'll just whip up a box exploding script a bit later when I have some spare time. (Purchase and mix in bulk until the lower end of the variability is reached, then purchase and craft one at a time. Easy-peasy.)
I think scripts are useless for protecting people from wasting all their meat because the people that will screw up are mostly going to be people that won't ever look at this forum. I also think that the inconsistency of a field that can open pre-filled with 100,000 as the value makes it different enough from the rest of the interface that inconsistency is guaranteed no matter how it works.