My wishlist for AFCADX

[Tasmanet]

My wishlist for AFCADX

I know some things will be a bit different in FX from these Fs9 tools

AFCAD with copy and paste
FLATTEN and the ability to make minor changes to the mesh for ditches ,underpasses etc
PHOTOSCENERY MAKER
EXCLUDE with the ability to remove or move default objects

Be able to move the new road system to line up with the photoscenery
And see all of these changes. Comprehensive Undo/Redo. Autosave.
Layers with Hide , Lock. All this would be fine in 2d.

etc etc

 

[scruffyduck]

OK we will see what we can do

 

[CanadaKen]

Hi Scruff

Are you starting AFCADX from scratch? I know Lee released the TTools source
code did he also release the AFCAD2 source code?

AFCAD2 and TTools sure got a workout on my PC's and so will AFCADX.

CK

 

[scruffyduck]

To the best of my knowledge Lee has not released the source code of AFCAD2. So any new software won't be based on the code from that program.

 

[lmoelleb]

Hi Scruff

Are you starting AFCADX from scratch? I know Lee released the TTools source
code did he also release the AFCAD2 source code?

AFCAD2 and TTools sure got a workout on my PC's and so will AFCADX.

CK

Yes, we are beginning from Scratch. I have not seen the AFCAD source, and even if it was available Lee programmed in C/C++, which pretty much render his source code obsolete (yes, I know some people think this is not the case, but that is their problem). Next to this we have requirements that extends further than AFCAD, so we probably need a different data structure.

 

[scruffyduck]

....Lee programmed in C/C++, which pretty much render his source code obsolete.....

Based on our poll of what language developers use (and the fact that much of FSX is developed in C++) I think that reports of it's demise are much exaggerated

 

[lmoelleb]

Based on our poll of what language developers use (and the fact that much of FSX is developed in C++) I think that reports of it's demise are much exaggerated

I do not question C/C++ is still being used.... I question if the users really know what they are doing (unless of course they make device drivers etc).

 

[Tasmanet]

ability in AFCADX to delete/hide runway/taxiway textures

Hi ScruffyDuck

And as in another post I just did the ability in AFCADX to delete/hide Runway/Taxiway textures if happy with the 7 cm photoscenery runway/taxiway textures.

Steve

 

[Pete Dowson]

I do not question C/C++ is still being used.... I question if the users really know what they are doing (unless of course they make device drivers etc).

That's a bit insulting isn't it? From my viewpoint it's really the users of higher level languages which don't actually know what they are really doing, it is all hidden from them, and even more so with so-called "managed" languages. If they could actually see the horrendous and inefficient torments they put the system and the processor through when they program in their innocence they might agree, but I suppose they wouldn't understand that level in any case.

I am basically an assembler language programmer of 43 years practice, and C (not even C++) is about as far away from what is really happening as I want to get. At least I can still understand what the program is doing beneath the statements I write, and follow the minor convolutions the compiler goes through, even in optimisation. I still occasionally resort to assembly code, not to make device drivers, but to get those inner loops really efficient. (That's a good book by the way -- "Inner Loops" by Rick Booth).

The higher level languages are good for prototyping a user interface, and, if used efficiently, are probably good for actually implementing predominantly user-interacting programs where speed and efficiency are not such a consequence and bloatware has become the acceptable norm, but I will fight for my right to produce fast, small and efficient programs without all the complexity and flab that those languages impose.

Best Regards

Pete

 

[scruffyduck]

OK I think that is the 'right of reply' for C/C++ Programmers

For the avoidance of doubt that means that we will not need to discuss the relative merits of different programs any further in this Forum.

Truth is that programmers tend to know what they are doing in their language(s) of choice. If it works for them then it is not for us to decide which is best or worst. Whether it is managed or not C++ or C#, VB6 or Delphi is irrelevant provided that you are happy and comfortable with what your are doing and the results meet your expectations and those of the guys who use the stuff

 

[lmoelleb]

Luckily I have experience from creating complex programs in C/C++ (with assembler optimizations) as well as C#, so I can base my decission on actual knowledge in both areas.

Just to be clear: A program like FSUIPC is indeed one of the few programs where I would consider C to be the best choice for now - but hopefully this will change in the future as FS evolves.

 

[jcboliveira]

Why do I feel that is not a language question but how good the programmer is? Sometimes I feel that the good programming is not questioned enough. Personally, I believe that my background as and electronic Engineer doesn't make me a good programmer in C# but reasonable C programmer since I'm too attached to the push pop and mov Of course when I feel nostalgic just remember those long hours burning EPROMS

José

 

[scruffyduck]

I think that is a very good point Jose, skill and familiarity with a particular tool may be more important than the tool itself.

 

[StORM48]

Greetings to all and sorry for interupting!

As you can see, I'm new guy here (and in the scenery design as well).

I just want to say that I really admire your work and that I'm really sorry cause I cannot help you with the tools developement (as I am not coder).

However, in very short time (about a month these days) I learned much about scenery design and never dreamed about to "speak" with the people who make tools for us, mortals

Concerning new design tool you're going to create, I'll feel free to say what I would like to see in the box...

- using custom textures in APT facility (aprons, rwys, taxiways...). In example, MS didn't menage to allow creating custom runway markings. As this is not going to be the case with the FSX, too - custom textures could do the job for the specific runways like grass (markings of the real grass runways, reminds on white coloured, lateral laid curbs on every 50 meters or so).
- compatibility for all kind of present object formats
- ability to import older sceneries in order to convert it into a new, FSX format
- ability to easily place trees and other plants into the scenery
- ability for automatic flatten area under the runway and level it, no matter up or down (in corelation of desired airport altitude)
-ability to change MDL objects textures.
-ability to convert AI aircrafts to static ones
-ability to load other tools files and BGL as well (as the old AFCAD does)

And, the one of most important - ability to make I snapshot of the current FS top-down view, which is aligned to the coordinates as in AFCADX, so I can see the right point of each object comparing to the autogen scenery and all other objects in FS.

I hope that this is not going to make you angry
These are just "boy's wishes", nothing more. I'm not thankless about what you do for all of us.

Sincerely, I can rembember a lot more of potential improvements, as long as you don't kick me out of forum, because of my avarice.

Best regards and good luck!
Dragan Stanojevic

 

[scruffyduck]

Hi Dragen

Thanks you very much for your suggestions - they are much appreciated and there are a lot of good ideas therre - many of them are already on the list for SDSX