Conversation
Report for GZLP01 (27f0df1 - e6f8731)📈 Matched code: 52.89% (+0.08%, +6040 bytes) ✅ 44 new matches
...and 14 more new matches Report for D44J01 (27f0df1 - e6f8731)📈 Matched code: 42.08% (+0.08%, +6128 bytes) ✅ 44 new matches
...and 14 more new matches Report for GZLJ01 (27f0df1 - e6f8731)📈 Matched code: 52.98% (+0.08%, +6036 bytes) ✅ 44 new matches
...and 14 more new matches Report for GZLE01 (27f0df1 - e6f8731)📈 Matched code: 54.26% (+0.08%, +6040 bytes) ✅ 44 new matches
...and 14 more new matches |
| const f32 daHmlif_c::m_cull_box[][6] = { | ||
| {-200.0f, -100.0f, -200.0f, 200.0f, 50.0f, 200.0f}, | ||
| {-200.0f, -100.0f, -200.0f, 200.0f, 450.0f, 200.0f}, | ||
| {-200.0f, -100.0f, -200.0f, 200.0f, 450.0f, 200.0f}, | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this still match when changed to an array of fopAc_cullSizeBox? Like in f_op_actor_mng.cpp
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nope, that makes initialisation runtime.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh I see, in that case it should be Vec[][2] like d_a_windmill.
| static cPhs_State daHmlif_Create(void* v_this) { | ||
| return ((daHmlif_c*)v_this)->daHmlifCreate(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does v_this mean something? It doesn't appear in the assertion strings for either TWW or TP.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's the void version of this, if we have a_this for the actor version, and i_this for the input one, I just decided to use v_this for the void version.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's still an input parameter so i_this seems right here. The devs tend to name the actor input parameter i_this regardless of whether its class is fopAc_ac_c* or a subclass so they probably do for void* as well.
|
Was there an issue with using |
Closes #216.