Matthijs 40 Posted January 1, 2003 Hi all, and a happy newyear! I have been wondering why people convert the .CPP files in their addons to .BIN Does it provide some advantage for the player? In my opinion it just hampers the development community. It's hard for starting addon makers to learn the ropes if they can't learn from the experienced addon makers. For this reason I'm not leaving my config files as CPP. Or is there something important advantage I'm missing out on? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VXR 9 Posted January 1, 2003 i think its because it works faster with the engine Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TYsiEK 0 Posted January 1, 2003 BIN is some like a compressed file format and that like Vixer told, it's working faster in game . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maslow 0 Posted January 1, 2003 well, and i don't think that it takes unexperied addonmakers the chance of learning from the bin since your abel to decompile without any problems Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ares1978 0 Posted January 1, 2003 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Maslow @ Jan. 01 2003,15:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">well, and i don't think that it takes unexperied addonmakers the chance of learning from the bin since your abel to decompile without any problems  <span id='postcolor'> How can it be decompiled? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kegetys 2 Posted January 1, 2003 Considering that the game, as far as I know, parses the config files in startup, I dont think using bin in addons really does any notable difference anywhere. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TYsiEK 0 Posted January 1, 2003 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Kegetys @ Jan. 01 2003,16:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Considering that the game, as far as I know, parses the config files in startup, I dont think using bin in addons really does any notable difference anywhere.<span id='postcolor'> Maybe difference is only on size after compile. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maslow 0 Posted January 2, 2003 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">How can it be decompiled?<span id='postcolor'> using unpbo 1.3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PiNs_Da_Smoka 0 Posted January 2, 2003 Does anyone know where 1.3 is hosted still? Because i have 1.4 and as you know, it no longer decompiles .bin files, which i still have yet to understand. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Sharpshooter 0 Posted January 2, 2003 Here you go: UnPBO Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sigma-6 29 Posted January 4, 2003 The primary advantage, as I can see, from using .bin files is that when you include a working CFGmodels in the config file, and then you binarize it, the addon will work in both 1.90 and 1.46 without crashing to desktop in the latter, and will eliminate the flash and headlights bugs. This is enough reason for me, because it means that an addonmaker can release a single, compressed version of the addon. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kegetys 2 Posted January 4, 2003 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Sigma-6 @ Jan. 05 2003,00:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The primary advantage, as I can see, from using .bin files is that when you include a working CFGmodels in the config file, and then you binarize it, the addon will work in both 1.90 and 1.46 without crashing to desktop in the latter, and will eliminate the flash and headlights bugs.<span id='postcolor'> That has nothing to do with using a bin format config file though, its just the model which is then in ODOL format. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sigma-6 29 Posted January 4, 2003 ah. That clarifies a few things. . . But, well, no, it just muddles them further. . . I need to line up the logic here. . . Is it true then, that if the model is in ODOL format, that I wouldn't need to add the CFGmodels? That's a bit confusing, because it doesn't work when I do that. Does the data on those selections and such get encoded into the model? Is it just that the CFGmodels data doesn't appear in MLOD format? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Sharpshooter 0 Posted January 5, 2003 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Sigma-6 @ Jan. 04 2003,19:57)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Is it true then, that if the model is in ODOL format, that I wouldn't need to add the CFGmodels?<span id='postcolor'> Quote from Binarize Readme: </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You have to create proper CfgModels section in your addon config file. Binarized addons should work properly in both 1.46 and 1.75 versions.<span id='postcolor'> I think you should write the CfgModels section Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sigma-6 29 Posted January 5, 2003 That wasn't what I was asking. I always write the CFGmodels section, because otherwise it doesn't work. as I said. I was asking whether or not the ODOL format took that data and put it in the model. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
