ptb | |
I've tried a large number of investigate blurb commands and pretty much all of them failed, only to give them the same header and text if i run a special action along the same lines. I emailed kjc about it but havn't got a reply, and currently i'm not very impressed because i'm wasting money investigating stuff i already know, and not new stuff that would intresst me. In fact this may relate back to a bug i filled about a year ago and was told it would be looked into but it's not urgent. Which is fair enough, but it's now a lot later and i would like to contine with my explorations. I can email kjc again with more details if you like, but i have no idea if you even got the first email. The position in question was 'Nightwatch (15575)' which is also the email subject. | |
David Bethel | |
Ok in general the investigate blurb seems to work. However its usually the specific, or any change in the blurb that could be the problem. | |
ptb | |
(http://www.spacious.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=591) seems i'm not the only person unable to get this to work. However this is what i tried Investigate Blurb {Investigation/XXXXX/YYYYY/Subsurface Scan} {The swamps have formed over an area where there} Error - Header/Match string did not have a match on this planet. Information processing charge of 100 stellars. Special action in the same area Result: Investigation/XXXXX/YYYYY/Subsurface Scan The swamps have formed over an area where there is little drainage due to the presence of clay soil. The crew bore samples from the clay and test in planet and type are removed (obvoiusly) This isn't the only order this has happend, and i don't wish to run though all of them trying special actions to get the current information. I'd much rather waste my money finding new stuff ![]() | |
ptb | |
Apparently gtdougs ones are failing too ![]() | |
Mica Goldstone | |
We have investigated this: Running the order at KJC sometimes produces a failure even though the same action always gives a success in the development model (same programs, same structure, just different computers but both running XP).... Yup we are a little confused, but David is working on it. | |
gtdoug | |
Woo Hoo! Thanks Mica! GTDoug. | |
ptb | |
Heh, don't you just love bugs like that. Almost as bad as tracking down memory leaks in a .net hybrid program... (no really i love my job... honest)![]() Good luck | |
David Bethel | |
It was just plain anoying. At some stage it started adding \r\n instead of \n to the special action database. I no longer bother looking for it - not sure why i did in the first place. So when i tested it the special had \n after the header and worked. Words can not describe how much i hate \r. Thankfully our bugs are all based on circumstances and generally when you can tie down what actually happened its fixes itsself. We thankfully don't have memory leaks horrors that much anymore, i think one cost be 7 hrs during the summer but that was the last. |