Conversation
|
Yikes, style doesn't match core/exts at all :(. I was under the impression this was going to be made more SDKTools like to match the existing API we have before a merge was proposed. |
|
@KyleSanderson this is WIP; not a proposal. I wanted to see linux builds Also wanted to see clear history of changes |
|
Hello would it be possible to implement the fix for the native DHookSetReturnVector before completing this pull request? Previous code was |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Fyren
changed the title
| vptr += sizeof(void *); | ||
| paramInfo = (SourceMod::PassInfo *)malloc(sizeof(SourceMod::PassInfo) * dg->params.size()); | ||
|
|
||
| for(int i = 0; i < (int)dg->params.size(); i++) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Isn't the real fix here to make this unsigned?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, I intentionally sided on this change as it was the cast that was used in other places throughout DHooks.
My plan going forward is to create another - separate - pull request that will merge changes into this branch that way we can separately review improvements to DHooks as a whole. It'll help with keeping history nice and tidy, unless you suggest that I keep it all in here. I'm not exactly sure what route is the best to keep history nice, but I imagine another PR based off this branch will help keep things clear
| { | ||
| vptr += sizeof(void *); | ||
| paramInfo = (SourceMod::PassInfo *)malloc(sizeof(SourceMod::PassInfo) * dg->params.size()); | ||
| for(int i = 0; i < (int)dg->params.size(); i++) |
|
@Drifter321 are you okay with re-licensing this project to AM? |
We got approval on Discord from him, but It doesn't hurt to make sure :) |
|
👍
… On May 12, 2019, at 11:45 PM, Headline ***@***.***> wrote:
@Drifter321 are you okay with re-licensing this project to AM?
We got approval on Discord from him, but It doesn't hurt to make sure :)
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
|
Drifter321
left a comment
Drifter321
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I made these changes to my version after you created this pr so just a heads up on those. Other changes would be to somehow keep bcompat and make it work more like sdktools.
|
@Headline can you do a final sync? We can get Ruben to unblock after that. |
|
Due to missing SM 1.10 builds of DHooks and a tendency to detour everything instead of using virtual hooks by plugin authors nowadays, I think a lot of servers are running the DHooks version with detouring support. Adding the one without detour natives in tree might cause some conflicts now 🙁 |
|
@peace-maker I think the best course of action here based on what's transpired over time is if you open a PR for your fork (as long as you're okay with the relicense to AM for your additions). @Drifter321 has already given his permission for this to be relicensed to AM (thanks man), and we close this one out not as INCOMPLETE but SUPERSEDED. |
6 participants
Through discussion in
#sourcemodwe are planning on bringing DHooks in-tree, so I guess I volunteered for the dirty work.There's still concerns about this and I also have yet to scour DHooks source for possible improvements so this is currently WIP.