Why no PNG screenshots? Qt can encode a QPixmap to PNG, if this answer by Kaleb Pederson is to be believed.
Code: Select all
QFile file("yourFile.png");
file.open(QIODevice::WriteOnly);
pixmap.save(&file, "PNG");
Moderator: Moderators
Code: Select all
QFile file("yourFile.png");
file.open(QIODevice::WriteOnly);
pixmap.save(&file, "PNG");
Individual is alive and well. Patience is a virtue.hex_usr wrote:Well, I sent a PM to AWJ this morning (shortly before 09:00 PDT). As of 17:00 PDT today, he hasn't responded.
I don't understand what you intend to gain by attempting to browbeat me into removing functionality from my software.hex_usr wrote:Yep, I just got his private message, too.
AWJ has spoken: his project is still alive, and he wants me to rename my project.
I replied to him that it would be really nice if he could either update bsnes-classic's manifest format to BML, or retire manifests and exclusively use heuristics. I'll still rename my project either way, but I'll be much happier about it if AWJ does either of these things.
Because it was always about the XML manifests; I wouldn't have ever bothered if bsnes v073 had no manifest support whatsoever.
In what way is "no manifest support" supposed to be an improvement over "older manifest support"? It wouldn't improve the situation with, for example, the FEoEZ translation. Likewise, retroactively removing manifest support entirely would just inconvenience actual users by breaking support for numerous existing projects for no particularly great reason.hex_usr wrote:Because it was always about the XML manifests; I wouldn't have ever bothered if bsnes v073 had no manifest support whatsoever.
As of v107, I've removed the board mapping rules from the manifests, and I'm making a promise not to break the format of manifest.bml again. Yes, seriously. I promised to not change BPS, and I haven't. And I promised not to change bass syntax anymore with v15, and I haven't. I promised MSU1 would remain backward compatible to v1.0, and it has.on the off chance that byuu ever decides to support some sort of BML-based manifests for the standalone ROM support in "new bsnes", I'd happily add support for that as soon as possible.
Totally understandable, hence "on the off chance" - I was pretty much assuming it wasn't actually going to happen, and I respect your decision about that.byuu wrote:As of v107, I've removed the board mapping rules from the manifests, and I'm making a promise not to break the format of manifest.bml again. Yes, seriously. I promised to not change BPS, and I haven't. And I promised not to change bass syntax anymore with v15, and I haven't. I promised MSU1 would remain backward compatible to v1.0, and it has.
Believe me, I greatly appreciate the work that's been put into this, even though my own fork doesn't directly benefit from it nearly as much as it could/should. And it has never really been my intent for bsnes-plus to somehow undermine or compete with mainline higan either, especially now that it's becoming (in my eyes) more and more attractive to the average user with every new release, not to mention the fact that it's much more actively maintained.I'd love it if other projects could utilize my SNES preservation database, because holy god damn I put a lot of time, money and effort into that, and I'm not even halfway finished yet. You don't need manifest files next to ROMs for that, though. You don't need game folders for it either, as I'm demonstrating with bsnes v107.
You have the one project where I completely understand why you're stuck on the version number you are. It needs such a massive amount of hooks into the core, and the core is constantly changed and cleaned up by myself. Bizhawk comes in second place, but I don't think a once-a-year core update there is asking too much.The fact is that I just decided one day to start on a little hobby project based on something I was personally familiar with, for better and/or worse. (Really, the only actual goal was for me to not have to use Geiger's debugger anymore, and I guess mission accomplished?)
Even so, didn't the later "laevateinn" debugger provide basically the same interface with a less outdated version of the actual emulator? It was probably just a bit of nearsightedness on my part, honestly.byuu wrote:You have the one project where I completely understand why you're stuck on the version number you are. It needs such a massive amount of hooks into the core, and the core is constantly changed and cleaned up by myself. Bizhawk comes in second place, but I don't think a once-a-year core update there is asking too much.
Duplication of effort notwithstanding, I think the fact that all these forks still have quite a lot of your work in common is a pretty serious net positive (could you imagine a world with twenty more closed-source snes9x forks instead? )byuu wrote:Beyond that, it saddens me that we're all duplicating effort here. I know a lot is my fault, I don't work well with others and merge their changes, as I'm picky about my codebase.
I'd call it less a matter of "doesn't require"; higan doesn't necessarily "require" them either since you can just import regular ROMs most of the time and let the rest be handled behind the scenes. The real problem (which I absolutely agree is a problem) is that bsnes-classic/plus don't even support cartridge folders.calima wrote:Wait, do I read it right that bsnes-plus does not require the annoying cartridge folder?
Handling it behind the scenes still copies the ROMs there. Which I don't like, both because it's ugly and because it puts the cart folders in my home dir, which is on a different disk to where I keep ROMs, and has much less space free.Revenant wrote:I'd call it less a matter of "doesn't require"; higan doesn't necessarily "require" them either since you can just import regular ROMs most of the time and let the rest be handled behind the scenes. The real problem (which I absolutely agree is a problem) is that bsnes-classic/plus don't even support cartridge folders.calima wrote:Wait, do I read it right that bsnes-plus does not require the annoying cartridge folder?
Just create a symlink if it's really that much.calima wrote:Handling it behind the scenes still copies the ROMs there. Which I don't like, both because it's ugly and because it puts the cart folders in my home dir, which is on a different disk to where I keep ROMs, and has much less space free.Revenant wrote:I'd call it less a matter of "doesn't require"; higan doesn't necessarily "require" them either since you can just import regular ROMs most of the time and let the rest be handled behind the scenes. The real problem (which I absolutely agree is a problem) is that bsnes-classic/plus don't even support cartridge folders.calima wrote:Wait, do I read it right that bsnes-plus does not require the annoying cartridge folder?