WoWInterface

WoWInterface (http://www.wowinterface.com/forums/index.php)
-   nUI: Technical Support (http://www.wowinterface.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=92)
-   -   Party screen (http://www.wowinterface.com/forums/showthread.php?t=44871)

FreeLancA 10-21-12 08:27 AM

Party screen
 
Hi, I unable to use some of the mouseover macros for the lower two members of my party. The top ones and myself work fine, also the lower one when selected and macro's from the selected player box work.

I'm a shammy healer btw.

Chain heal, greater healing wave works, but riptide doesn't. Only with the lowermost positioned two members.

Any ideas?

Thank you for your time. :D

Xrystal 10-21-12 09:14 AM

Could it be a range thing? That would be the only reason why one spell would work in a macro compared to another that I could think of.

I don't recall the unit frames changing in a long while and I used to shammy heal back in ICC days with little problems. It might have been sheer coincidence that I never used riptide on the bottom frames but for over a year is a bit doubtful.

FreeLancA 10-27-12 10:16 PM

and another thing.. :)
 
just did my 1st 25 man, got the same issue with all raid members under the top most one.

I have the mouse-over macros bound to the mouse-wheel up/down, would this make a difference?

Left/right mouse-wheel work fine however.

Range is not the cause.

Example of macro:

#showtooltip Riptide
/run UIErrorsFrame:Clear()
/cast [target=mouseover] Riptide

all macros are much the same, just spells changed.

Thanks.

FreeLancA 10-27-12 10:27 PM

Ah ha!
 
Experimented in a 5-man.

Swapped riptide (currently on mouse-wheel forward) with chain heal (currently on mouse-wheel left)

Then the riptide worked on lower placed members & the chain heal didn't.

the lower member placards don't respond to mouse-wheel forward/backward bindings it would seem.

Is this something that can be coded for please?



Thanks for your time.

FreeLancA 10-28-12 12:36 AM

potential issue #2
 
Unrelated but... does anyone else get the oddity where the top 30-40% of the screen will make water disappear.
Scrolling the camera up and down over a watery edge will cut through the animation, showing the sandy bottom at screen top, and watery graphic goodness on the lower part of the screen.

Odd eh?

Xrystal 10-28-12 02:26 AM

I never really used mouse wheel as an option as it seemed unnecessary. I used to simply hover and pressed the number for mouseovers and left and right click when clicking buttons on target or focus.

I'm still not sure why only the bottom part of the party is affected by this as nUI has a single block of code for a unit and each unit uses that same block of code ( as far as I have seen anyway - scott will have to confirm ).

There did used to be a problem however with getting certain parts of the unit frame to recognise the mouse was over it so possibly by sheer coincidence you are hitting that problem on the bottom frames.

As to the water issue that is a viewport problem. try using nUI's toggle to turn it off. /nui viewport. You will have to type it twice for it to trigger as it seems the first time you use it each time it toggles it off.

spiel2001 10-28-12 08:31 AM

*lightbulb moment*

nUI uses the mousewheel up/down for controlling the minimap zoom. I bet nUI is stealing your assignment of the mousewheel to spells (I never would have considered doing that, so it never occurred to me... I have always used the mousewheel for zoom control in the 3D world and on the minimap.

Xrystal 10-28-12 09:07 AM

how could you not think of that scott .. oh wait .. neither had I rofl .. I only ever used the scroll for zoom too haha

Coasty 10-28-12 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xrystal (Post 267887)
how could you not think of that scott .. oh wait .. neither had I rofl .. I only ever used the scroll for zoom too haha

Reminds me of my dinosaur days when I still did programming (think DEC PDP-11, Altair, Processor Technology Sol-20, Apple II if you go back that far). After I retired from the service in 1983, I moved on to other things and haven't really done any real programing since. When it comes to C (and all its variants) I still think in assembly, i.e. C++/Lua et al usually look like chicken tracks to me when it comes to trying to figure out program structure, mostly, I'd guess, because I've never taken the time to learn the syntax. :o

At the time, because of work, I was fluent in Cobol, Fortran, Pascal and Assembly (especially assembly language as I did a ton of I/O port programming on PDP-11's and their equivalents). For my own use at home my projects were mostly graphics orientated assembly language programs/utilities/sub-routines because I fiddled around a lot with bitmap and vector graphics. I used the other languages mostly as menu/screen wrappers around the real code and just about always I had to do it myself as nothing was available commercially to do what I wanted to do. Most of the stuff I wrote used to be available for download in what are now old, as in really really ancient, university repositories, at least they used to be, I haven't bothered to check and see if they still are. Gotta admit though, I can't imagine why anybody would want any of it these days as I doubt if many people still have and use those old machines. What the heck, mine still work, so I still use them to run things around the house (lights, heating, appliances, what ever takes my fancy, etc) mostly using programs I wrote 30 or so years ago. My PDP-11, for example, is still used to run my N-gauge model train layout.

Anyway, getting back to my original point, I used to use my brother and cousin as alpha/beta testers on my projects, and they were forever finding ways to crash things, mostly by doing absolutely idiotic things. My usual response was, "Why in the hell, you blockhead, did you even try to do that!!!!". They were absolute geniuses at finding totally illogical ways to break routines that never occurred to me, and irritated me in the process. When you're the writer you're your own worst enemy when it comes to catching bugs. :o

It's amazing how often others can find ways you never, ever, thought of to catch you up short. :)

spiel2001 10-29-12 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coasty (Post 267944)
It's amazing how often others can find ways you never, ever, thought of to catch you up short. :)

Truer words never spoken.

Coasty 10-31-12 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spiel2001 (Post 268004)
Truer words never spoken.

Seeing as I mentioned in my last post about programming in the good old early days, that laughably could have been called 'desktop' computing, I thought I'd mention this:

Today I was catching up on the last several weeks of articles/comments on the blog TechDirt (you should check it out), some of which were about software patents. The articles about software patents caused me to wonder how any reasonably intelligent person, especially anybody with a math background, could possibly decide that software algorithms should ever be allowed to be patented in the first place! I read the final application paperwork on several patents created in the last 25 or so years, and especially notable were several that were part of the Apple/Samsung lawsuit. They are so broadly written as to be laughable, so much so that they should have been declared invalid and thrown out by the court before it ever got to a jury. My God, several of them, by my own personal knowledge, had multiple instances of prior art going back to the late 60's/early 70's, created independently by multiple programmers! Hell, for anybody with a Math background (especially Boolean logic) they were blindingly obvious, the only limiting factor as to use of the code being whether or not you had enough ram to include it.

As an aside, for you youngsters out there, back in those days having 8k or, if you were really lucky, 16k of ram was considered Nirvana!!!

How in the world did some schmuck ever decide software patents were a good idea or, even worse, necessary!!!!


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:23 AM.

vBulletin © 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd
©2012 ZAM Network LLC