OR route compatability

[longiron]

After I checked the Full Bucket Line with Routeriter and corrected a small amount of errors I am getting messages about fatal error of some sort. Anyone else having problems in OR with this route?

After many hours of testing, the OR development team found the software is not correctly reading the comment at the top of the sigcfg.dat file, which causes Open Rails to not "see" the LightTextures section directly following it.

1. the OR team will not be making changes to the parsing code to accomodate the Comment section. There's just too many poorly formed or inconsistent ways that Comments have been implemented in the MSTS files

2. Simply removing the Comment section at the top of the sigcfg.dat file allows Open Rails correctly parse the file.

[lindsayts]

After many hours of testing, the OR development team found the software is not correctly reading the comment at the top of the sigcfg.dat file, which causes Open Rails to not "see" the LightTextures section directly following it.

1. the OR team will not be making changes to the parsing code to accomodate the Comment section. There's just too many poorly formed or inconsistent ways that Comments have been implemented in the MSTS files

2. Simply removing the Comment section at the top of the sigcfg.dat file allows Open Rails correctly parse the file.

Being a bit curious how would the parser like to see comments set up so one could correctly put in comments?. Certainly in source code I regard comments as critcal in making something I have writen easier to understand say in a years time. (It has been mentioned a few times try next morning after programming till 0300 hours in the morning).

Lindsay

[OTTODAD]

The OR team will not be making changes to the parsing code to accomodate the Comment section. There's just too many poorly formed or inconsistent ways that Comments have been implemented in the MSTS files.

There are many Comment ( ....... ) paragraphs in MSTS files, mainly rolling stock and the code used by ORTS should ignore them just the same !

O t t o

[longiron]

We're not talking about traditional comment line, but the following:

From the 3rd line, "Skip _(", down to line 78, ")", just before line 80, "LightTextures ( 1". Lines 3 through 78 are the comment. (For the version of the route and file I have.)

[twpol]

Being a bit curious how would the parser like to see comments set up so one could correctly put in comments?. Certainly in source code I regard comments as critcal in making something I have writen easier to understand say in a years time. (It has been mentioned a few times try next morning after programming till 0300 hours in the morning).

OR ignores "Comment" and "Skip" blocks (e.g. "Comment ( ... )") and any block with a name starting with a "#" or "_" (e.g. "#Foo ( ... )") but not the unusual format found in this file, which is "Skip _( ... )".

[longiron]

To close out the conversation, removing the offending data allows OR to load and run FBL as noted here: http://www.elvastower.com/forums/ind...748#entry76748

[Tailwheel]

To close out the conversation, removing the offending data allows OR to load and run FBL as noted here: http://www.elvastower.com/forums/ind...748#entry76748

Chris,
thanks for referencing the solution I found by reading posts here at TrainSim and Elvas Tower. Although not exactly telling me what to do it did raise possible solution in my mind and by working on a copy of the original sigcfg.dat file I knew I could always "revert" back if it did not work. I originally thought I would have to delete the entire comment section which I did not know exactly what that was. The posts I read helped me greatly in discovering the solution that worked for me.
Thanks to everyone for their input and suggestions. Just another group grope that turned out positive in the end.

[Stuz]

Thanks Chris. FBL now up and running.
Regards Stu

[lindsayts]

OR ignores "Comment" and "Skip" blocks (e.g. "Comment ( ... )") and any block with a name starting with a "#" or "_" (e.g. "#Foo ( ... )") but not the unusual format found in this file, which is "Skip _( ... )".

Much thanks, definitely been noted.

Lindsay

[MP36PH3S]

A final solution to a long-standing problem of mine. So this should be a fix for any sigcfg file that OR has trouble with? If so I recommend this should be stickied.

[muskokaandtahoe]

A final solution to a long-standing problem of mine. So this should be a fix for any sigcfg file that OR has trouble with? If so I recommend this should be stickied.

It is more general than that: MSTS allows for a large number of forms to note a comment and IIRC there are some forms that work here but don't work there. The OR team eventually threw it's collective hands up in frustration and as the programers ran off into the woods the shriek of "We're not going to try to be 100% backwards compatible on comments while there is so much other useful stuff to do" was heard... but they were a bit more concise that that... just two words actually: something along the lines of "Fudge this".

Soooo with that intellectually impeccable and irreproachable decision, so eloquently phrased, we've moved on. Got a weird problem? Try removing the comments and see if that fixes things.

[MP36PH3S]

Alright that at least needs to be stickied.