BPv181_4611 BUT_ONLY error
#1
Posted 21 December 2015 - 12:59 PM
#2
Posted 21 December 2015 - 07:53 PM
DECOMPILE_BCS_TO_BAFWell, I can say that the code is ancient. UI would like to see the use of:
...
COMPILE_BAF_TO_BCS
DECOMPILE_AND_PATCH
...
END
Yep, Jarno Mikkola. my Mega Mod FAQ. Use of the BWS, and how to use it(scroll down that post a bit).
OK, desert dweller, welcome to the sanity, you are free to search for the limit, it's out there, we drew it in the sand. Ouh, actually it was still snow then.. but anyways.
#3
Posted 22 December 2015 - 08:04 AM
Ignore... I'm dumb The errant END was the end of the DEFINE block
Anyway, does the Imp's suggestion work?
DECOMPILE_AND_PATCH BEGIN
...
END
Otherwise, you might wanna get Wisp's attention in these forums
Edited by Lollorian, 22 December 2015 - 08:08 AM.
"I am the smiley addict, yellow and round, this is my grin when I'm usually around .
When there's trouble brewing, see me post, cuz it's usually a wall o' yellow and your eyes are toast!!!"
BWP GUIDE - BWP FIXES - impFAQ - NPC LIST - KIT LIST - AREA LIST
GitHub Links : BWP Fixpack | Lolfixer | BWP Trimpack | RezMod
#4
Posted 22 December 2015 - 04:34 PM
You can throw a DECOMPILE_AND_PATCH in there, but that won't change the logic.
Generally, you don't want to use BUT_ONLY when you are copying to a new filename, because it means it's possible that the new file won't be created (if the patch results in no changes). You could get rid of the BUT_ONLY to ensure these files will always be created.
However, the author probably expected that this file would contain ChangeAnimationNoEffect("TROLL02"), and it may be the case that something different should be done when it doesn't contain that line. So, does it contain the line, and if not, why not?
Edited by Mike1072, 22 December 2015 - 04:37 PM.