[mame2003/-plus] Removing individual per-game bindings via Tab menu

grant2258

@Riverstorm issue that caused this is fixed with no user intervention when the pull request is done if it is.
Im trying to be civil here. The pull Request is in for this fix for this game. Your attitude really needs a little work

grant2258

https://github.com/libretro/mame2003-plus-libretro/pull/465

please speak to mark about the tab menu. Thats up to you and him

Riverstorm

@grant2258 said in [mame2003/-plus] Removing individual per-game bindings via Tab menu:

Your attitude really needs a little work

I'm trying to be civil also. I suspect taking some of your own advice wouldn't hurt either but that seems to last only few days, maybe a week before you start picking at the issues I post. I am honestly posting them to improve the core too believe it or not. Lately I've been hunting down bugs and to make it my final core instead of maintaining both 2003 cores but also I post them through normal play because I like when my favorite games work too. I am just trying to get this core the best it can be too. If we work together in a bi-partisan way it may be just that!

If you would close the Github issue on the TAB menu I would appreciate it as further discussion on the subject isn't needed. Thanks Grant.

grant2258

no problems on closing the github issue. Ill just make sure @Clyde is happy enough with it. If anyone else has this issue on another version oh mame turn your cheats off.

Riverstorm

I believe Clyde made his last attempt at delivering an organized laid out real case scenario pertaining to the issue 2 days ago. I think he's done but he might reply and be happy enough with the outcome. Anyway I guess give it time and see.

grant2258

well the issue causing the problem is fixed but the main theme of wanting it added isint. Thats a job for someone else the code is there to do it.

Ive deal with the part i was focused on just giving the thread its conclusion so everyone get there say

grant2258

dealt

Riverstorm

Right, correct. I didn't mean to speak for @Clyde and he may return to the thread and post a thought or two on the conclusion but I honestly think he was done. I guess we'll wait and see.

grant2258

will just close after a few days mr @Riverstorm if we get no reply ill assume he is ok with the way it is.

Clyde

Hi, just stepping in in the ~~few moments~~ one hour I have today between coming home and going to bed. I don't have much free time on weekdays for profound internet discussions, that's the main reason I didn't answer here since sunday.

Another reason is that I'm quite lost at what @grant2258's code is actually doing. Does it set a binding to none with a single or double Esc with or without Enter before? I don't know what the "magic key" is in the first post of https://github.com/libretro/mame2003-plus-libretro/issues/451. I would be grateful if anyone would explain it to me.

As for the fix for Assault, I don't think that fixing single games is a sufficient solution for the lack of a none binding in Input (this game). Neither would be a code change that removes the possibility to reset a binding to the default value.

So I'm left to suggesting my preferred solution – changing mame2003/plus to the behaviour of current MAME and AdvMAME: That a single Esc after Enter will change …

a custom binding to none,
none to default, and
default to none. Rinse and repeat.

edit: Additionally, a single Del without Enter before should set a binding to none.

That way, we would …

get the option to remove a binding completely,
avoid dummy bindings that may be triggered accidentally,
retain the option to set a binding to the default, and
offer anyone who is used to current MAME and/or AdvMAME a consistent user interface.

I don't think it is conductive to focus on single examples, as the advantage of nullifying single bindings at will without the crutch of a dummy binding for either testing or fixing any number of unwanted controls should be obvious, regardless of whether they are problematic or just not preferred.

And just to be on the safe side, I am talking about MAME's Tab menu and nothing else, as I did from the beginning of this thread.

grant2258

just post on the issue page if mark wants to update the legacy gui. To advancemame and current mame standards im sure you can work it out together ill leave it with you two .

As for the coding change you wanted to set it to none that what the code does no magic key left left ect will clear it to none instead of default to none of defaults nothing more.

Mark does know where the code is to work on this he is approachable.

as for the fix its not game specific.

you wont have these issues on other mames if you disable cheats. its explained in the github issue whats happening with this game and a few others .

sorry if i wasnt clear the fix is none user intervention the code posted where to set the key to none is something else.

markwkidd

I still need to reread this thread carefully, but to echo Grant -- each time someone has posted a specific game where they want a None mapping, it has turned out that there is an input bug with that game driver underlying the reason for wanting None. In that sense, it does seem very productive to keep giving examples because bugs are being fixed.

markwkidd

I apologize for making on the fly replies, but also in general I think it's good to keep up with either what current MAME or FB Alpha does when there is some part of the user experience that can be unified across the emulators.

So in principle I'm also interested in bringing things into conformity. Grant and I have both been committing a relatively large amount of code the last few days as we try to take care of some outstanding bugs and other cleanup. When I say I need to reread this thread, I also need to look at Grant's prototype of this new functionality.

Is a best of both worlds where 1) you and Riverstorm keep listing games that require this treatment so that they can be investigated while also 2) I try to understand how this works in later MAME from a user experience and work with Grant's initial code to see if we can make it work in a way that is compatible with everything else that is going on in our version of the MAME input code?

Riverstorm

@markwkidd - Yeah I am ok with that proposal. It's pretty much the same as what I posted above. This enhanced functionality puts Plus inline with MAME "current", AdvMAME and some derivative works so the user may handle these types of exceptions themselves and without using "placeholders". It was implied for TAB only input as Input (this game) doesn't exist in RA.

I agree it does help track down bugs and there's been some updates for classic games. You have to love that Assault tank roll or the split stick mortar shot. It's a fun game the same as Vindicators is great also. They both work great with tank stick not mappings as well as Battle Zone.

I don't know if you saw the list earlier. You might have squashed some of these bugs already and some are not necessarily related to this post but they are bugs. I can post them in the main thread if it helps.

Assault (control issues and extraneous fields 4 total; player 1). Also with Assault the input fields are grouped by name so P1 Right/Up is below P2 Right/Up or P1 Button 1 is in the middle of the list and P1 Button 2 at the bottom. So this basically interleaves the P1 and P2 fields all the way to the bottom instead of listing all the P1 fields first and then all the P2 fields. It's very difficult to follow.
Vindicators same issue of extraneous fields (8 total; 4 for each player)
Button labels on controller show incorrectly in TAB input (i.e. - Button B = RetroPad1 B RetroPad1 Rstick Down)
Joust, Joust 2, Robotron & Food Fight have bootstrap issues. Food Fight looks like it just needs an enter, so that one might be ok. It's not really an issue on the Pi but other platforms I believe that need that bootstrap to start. Those are some pretty classic games.

I tested the rest of the list posted in the Github issue where SapphireTactician left off. I updated the last post with the results a few weeks ago. If there's other bootstraps to test just let me know.

Parent and clones needing bootstraps:

foodf
foodf2
foodfc

joust
joustwr

joust2

robotron
robotryo

grant2258

i have to leave for work have you read the issue? explanation rstick isint wrong it is mapped and is mappable in mame2003+

Riverstorm

@grant2258 said in [mame2003/-plus] Removing individual per-game bindings via Tab menu:

i have to leave for work have you read the issue?

I haven't, if it's been fixed that's fine. I know you guys did a lot of updates yesterday and I am actually behind several days now.

Clyde

Hi, just popping in to say that although I did read every post since my last one, I'm too tired to answer adequately at the moment. But I'll do so in the course of tomorrow; and in short, I concur with most of what's being said.

Thanks to all of you for participating in this and for keeping it civil despite of some misunderstandings and disagreements. 👍 (<- In case you can't read this; it's a Thumbs Up unicode character.)

Good night. 😴

Riverstorm

@Clyde - Thumbs up is looking good but the finger nail needs trimming.

markwkidd

@Riverstorm IIRC you logged those NVRAM bootstrap issues in the bootstrap issue on github, right?

I will eventually sit down for an afternoon of generating NVRAM and turning it into bootstrap files, and I'll get those. It may be a little bit longer but not forever.

I also have it in mind to write a tutorial to make it easier for someone like yourself to generate the NVRAM file, submit it to me, and then I do the processing.

No need to set up a compiler environment or anything like that. In a nutshell: use standalone MAME 0.78 (usually) to generate an NVRAM that works, test it in mame2003-plus, then send it in. But I digress -- I will definitely get back to the bootstrap issue. And write a simpler guide to NVRAM.

Maybe that's going to be my Thanksgiving holiday project.

Riverstorm

@markwkidd said in [mame2003/-plus] Removing individual per-game bindings via Tab menu:

IIRC you logged those NVRAM bootstrap issues in the bootstrap issue on github, right?

I did I do have them generated if you can use them. I generated several from 2003 and Plus to compared CRC's and they match. I wasn't sure if there would be differences between the two versions but from the ones that need bootstraps both versions of 2003 are identical.