reenable forceequip
#4979
Open
reenable forceequip
#4979
+50
−50
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
remove `using namespace std` remove references to MapCache and related
switched to using debug facility instead of `Core::print`/`Core::printerr` may need further tweaking
myk002
reviewed
Oct 4, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
remember also to add a line to New Tools in the changelog and update forceequip.rst (at least the tags, which should no longer be "unavailable")
Tags in the spreadsheet are:
adventure fort animals items military units
but that classification might need updating. is animals actually appropriate?
edit: oh, I see. it's because it can be used to put armor onto war animals
|
yeah i was holding off on the administrivia until i get some intel that this actually works |
update docs update remaining messaging to use debug logger
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Looked into this based on discord discussion, determined that the code compiles if adjusted to comport with @Bumber64's changes from #4824 so the question at this point is whether it works which I don't have enough information to evaluate