Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Added VehicleModel definitions. - #19
Conversation
Y-Less
commented
Sep 19, 2023
OK, I'll replicate my comments from discord here just for completeness:
|
I don't think vehicle models should be ignored. It should also be defined in the same way like weapons to achieve cleaner, more transparent code. It’s a pain to update game modes (and libraries) - but as you said it can be disabled so it’s optional.
Can you be more specific what I did wrong?
I’ve removed it.
I think it’s fixed now.
The model definitions are based on the vehicle original entries from the .gxt files. |
Zorono
commented
Dec 12, 2023
this pr is a horrible addition... it will make a lot of issues with original syntax (tag mismatch)... |
r4sheed
commented
Dec 12, 2023
Do you know what is horrible? Search for 'samp vehicle models' then find a |
Zorono
commented
Dec 13, 2023
i am complaining about that change for modelid parameters' tag |
shierru
commented
Jan 1, 2024
I would leave the list of vehicles, but I think As for the list of vehicles and the ability to use a certain constant name instead of a model, which already has a certain meaning, I consider it a good practice. But it shouldn’t be mandatory, otherwise it will simply become useless if you have to “rigidly” adapt the code to it. |
Y-Less
commented
Feb 7, 2024
What we can do for now is use: #define VEHICLE_MODEL:_:Instead of the define as-is. This way we get the advantages of named constants and natives marked as requiring model IDs, but without actually having the tags yet. And further down the line switching this out becomes almost trivial. The PR does still need the |
Trysha-rbrn
commented
Nov 26, 2024
+1(kinda bump ig) |
No description provided.