mpo/VVVVVV
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/TerryCavanagh/VVVVVV.git synced 2024-06-26 14:38:30 +02:00
Code Issues Releases Wiki Activity
f3786a8e3f
VVVVVV/desktop_version/src/Textbox.h

47 lines
666 B
C
Raw Normal View History

Hello WWWWWWorld!
2020-01-01 21:29:24 +01:00
#ifndef TEXTBOX_H
#define TEXTBOX_H
#include <string>
#include <vector>
class textboxclass
{
public:
Explicitly declare void for all void parameter functions (#628) Apparently in C, if you have `void test();`, it's completely okay to do `test(2);`. The function will take in the argument, but just discard it and throw it away. It's like a trash can, and a rude one at that. If you declare it like `void test(void);`, this is prevented. This is not a problem in C++ - doing `void test();` and `test(2);` is guaranteed to result in a compile error (this also means that right now, at least in all `.cpp` files, nobody is ever calling a void parameter function with arguments and having their arguments be thrown away). However, we may not be using C++ in the future, so I just want to lay down the precedent that if a function takes in no arguments, you must explicitly declare it as such. I would've added `-Wstrict-prototypes`, but it produces an annoying warning message saying it doesn't work in C++ mode if you're compiling in C++ mode. So it can be added later.
2021-02-25 23:23:59 +01:00
textboxclass(void);
Hello WWWWWWorld!
2020-01-01 21:29:24 +01:00
Explicitly declare void for all void parameter functions (#628) Apparently in C, if you have `void test();`, it's completely okay to do `test(2);`. The function will take in the argument, but just discard it and throw it away. It's like a trash can, and a rude one at that. If you declare it like `void test(void);`, this is prevented. This is not a problem in C++ - doing `void test();` and `test(2);` is guaranteed to result in a compile error (this also means that right now, at least in all `.cpp` files, nobody is ever calling a void parameter function with arguments and having their arguments be thrown away). However, we may not be using C++ in the future, so I just want to lay down the precedent that if a function takes in no arguments, you must explicitly declare it as such. I would've added `-Wstrict-prototypes`, but it produces an annoying warning message saying it doesn't work in C++ mode if you're compiling in C++ mode. So it can be added later.
2021-02-25 23:23:59 +01:00
void centerx(void);
Hello WWWWWWorld!
2020-01-01 21:29:24 +01:00
Explicitly declare void for all void parameter functions (#628) Apparently in C, if you have `void test();`, it's completely okay to do `test(2);`. The function will take in the argument, but just discard it and throw it away. It's like a trash can, and a rude one at that. If you declare it like `void test(void);`, this is prevented. This is not a problem in C++ - doing `void test();` and `test(2);` is guaranteed to result in a compile error (this also means that right now, at least in all `.cpp` files, nobody is ever calling a void parameter function with arguments and having their arguments be thrown away). However, we may not be using C++ in the future, so I just want to lay down the precedent that if a function takes in no arguments, you must explicitly declare it as such. I would've added `-Wstrict-prototypes`, but it produces an annoying warning message saying it doesn't work in C++ mode if you're compiling in C++ mode. So it can be added later.
2021-02-25 23:23:59 +01:00
void centery(void);
Hello WWWWWWorld!
2020-01-01 21:29:24 +01:00
Explicitly declare void for all void parameter functions (#628) Apparently in C, if you have `void test();`, it's completely okay to do `test(2);`. The function will take in the argument, but just discard it and throw it away. It's like a trash can, and a rude one at that. If you declare it like `void test(void);`, this is prevented. This is not a problem in C++ - doing `void test();` and `test(2);` is guaranteed to result in a compile error (this also means that right now, at least in all `.cpp` files, nobody is ever calling a void parameter function with arguments and having their arguments be thrown away). However, we may not be using C++ in the future, so I just want to lay down the precedent that if a function takes in no arguments, you must explicitly declare it as such. I would've added `-Wstrict-prototypes`, but it produces an annoying warning message saying it doesn't work in C++ mode if you're compiling in C++ mode. So it can be added later.
2021-02-25 23:23:59 +01:00
void adjust(void);
Hello WWWWWWorld!
2020-01-01 21:29:24 +01:00
void initcol(int rr, int gg, int bb);
Explicitly declare void for all void parameter functions (#628) Apparently in C, if you have `void test();`, it's completely okay to do `test(2);`. The function will take in the argument, but just discard it and throw it away. It's like a trash can, and a rude one at that. If you declare it like `void test(void);`, this is prevented. This is not a problem in C++ - doing `void test();` and `test(2);` is guaranteed to result in a compile error (this also means that right now, at least in all `.cpp` files, nobody is ever calling a void parameter function with arguments and having their arguments be thrown away). However, we may not be using C++ in the future, so I just want to lay down the precedent that if a function takes in no arguments, you must explicitly declare it as such. I would've added `-Wstrict-prototypes`, but it produces an annoying warning message saying it doesn't work in C++ mode if you're compiling in C++ mode. So it can be added later.
2021-02-25 23:23:59 +01:00
void update(void);
Hello WWWWWWorld!
2020-01-01 21:29:24 +01:00
Explicitly declare void for all void parameter functions (#628) Apparently in C, if you have `void test();`, it's completely okay to do `test(2);`. The function will take in the argument, but just discard it and throw it away. It's like a trash can, and a rude one at that. If you declare it like `void test(void);`, this is prevented. This is not a problem in C++ - doing `void test();` and `test(2);` is guaranteed to result in a compile error (this also means that right now, at least in all `.cpp` files, nobody is ever calling a void parameter function with arguments and having their arguments be thrown away). However, we may not be using C++ in the future, so I just want to lay down the precedent that if a function takes in no arguments, you must explicitly declare it as such. I would've added `-Wstrict-prototypes`, but it produces an annoying warning message saying it doesn't work in C++ mode if you're compiling in C++ mode. So it can be added later.
2021-02-25 23:23:59 +01:00
void remove(void);
Hello WWWWWWorld!
2020-01-01 21:29:24 +01:00
Explicitly declare void for all void parameter functions (#628) Apparently in C, if you have `void test();`, it's completely okay to do `test(2);`. The function will take in the argument, but just discard it and throw it away. It's like a trash can, and a rude one at that. If you declare it like `void test(void);`, this is prevented. This is not a problem in C++ - doing `void test();` and `test(2);` is guaranteed to result in a compile error (this also means that right now, at least in all `.cpp` files, nobody is ever calling a void parameter function with arguments and having their arguments be thrown away). However, we may not be using C++ in the future, so I just want to lay down the precedent that if a function takes in no arguments, you must explicitly declare it as such. I would've added `-Wstrict-prototypes`, but it produces an annoying warning message saying it doesn't work in C++ mode if you're compiling in C++ mode. So it can be added later.
2021-02-25 23:23:59 +01:00
void removefast(void);
Hello WWWWWWorld!
2020-01-01 21:29:24 +01:00
Explicitly declare void for all void parameter functions (#628) Apparently in C, if you have `void test();`, it's completely okay to do `test(2);`. The function will take in the argument, but just discard it and throw it away. It's like a trash can, and a rude one at that. If you declare it like `void test(void);`, this is prevented. This is not a problem in C++ - doing `void test();` and `test(2);` is guaranteed to result in a compile error (this also means that right now, at least in all `.cpp` files, nobody is ever calling a void parameter function with arguments and having their arguments be thrown away). However, we may not be using C++ in the future, so I just want to lay down the precedent that if a function takes in no arguments, you must explicitly declare it as such. I would've added `-Wstrict-prototypes`, but it produces an annoying warning message saying it doesn't work in C++ mode if you're compiling in C++ mode. So it can be added later.
2021-02-25 23:23:59 +01:00
void resize(void);
Hello WWWWWWorld!
2020-01-01 21:29:24 +01:00
Use `const std::string&` where possible in function params If it's at all possible to use `const std::string&` when passing `std::string`s around, then we use it. This is to limit the amount of memory usage as a result of the frequent use of `std::string`s, so the game no longer unnecessarily copies strings when it doesn't need to.
2021-09-07 00:41:49 +02:00
void addline(const std::string& t);
Hello WWWWWWorld!
2020-01-01 21:29:24 +01:00
public:
//Fundamentals
Rename `textbox` to `textboxes` and textbox `line` to `lines` It's really dumb that these array names aren't plural when they should be, because they contain more than one thing.
2021-09-13 06:02:15 +02:00
std::vector<std::string> lines;
Remove useless variable `lw` from `textboxclass` This variable is only assigned to, but never read from. Hence, it is useless, and should be removed to make code analysis less complicated.
2021-09-06 08:04:34 +02:00
int xp, yp, w, h;
Hello WWWWWWorld!
2020-01-01 21:29:24 +01:00
int r,g,b;
int timer;
float tl;
Interpolate text box alpha This makes text boxes fade in and out pretty smoothly. This requires that the textboxclass::setcol() be in Graphics::drawgui(), so now it's moved there. Text box fading is only really noticeable if you're playing in slowmode.
2020-04-29 06:49:15 +02:00
float prev_tl;
Hello WWWWWWorld!
2020-01-01 21:29:24 +01:00
int tm;
Add flipme attribute to textboxclass Instead of calculating the y-position of the text box when it's created, we will store a flag that says whether or not the text box should be flipped in Flip Mode (and thus stay right-side-up), and when it comes time to draw the text box, we will check Flip Mode and calculate the position then.
2021-03-20 03:51:36 +01:00
/* Whether to flip text box y-position in Flip Mode. */
bool flipme;
Don't update crewmate colors in text boxes every deltaframe Colors in over-30-FPS mode shouldn't be updating every deltaframe; mostly to ensure determinism between switching 30-mode and over-30 mode. I'm going to overhaul RNG in 2.4 anyway, but right now I'm going to fix this because I missed it. The RNG of each special text box is stored in a temporary variable on the text box itself, and only updated if the color uses it (hence the big if-statement). Lots of code duplication, but this is acceptable for now.
2021-03-23 22:29:32 +01:00
int rand;
Hello WWWWWWorld!
2020-01-01 21:29:24 +01:00
};
#endif /* TEXTBOX_H */
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink