Build Your Own Arcade Controls Forum

Main => Software Forum => Topic started by: TheGatesofBill on September 21, 2004, 09:19:40 pm

Title: No Name MAME Question
Post by: TheGatesofBill on September 21, 2004, 09:19:40 pm
Okay, I have two options on what to do with No Name MAME, and I'm wondering all your opinions.

1. I press on and try to fix up the current version of the code and get the updates in there.
2. I start over with the current version of MAME and slowly add the changes back in.

If you do not have a touch tone phone, stay on the line and an operator will assit you.
Title: Re:No Name MAME Question
Post by: RetroBorg on September 21, 2004, 10:56:00 pm
Great to see you're back.  ;D
Title: Re:No Name MAME Question
Post by: TheGatesofBill on September 21, 2004, 11:01:58 pm
Been back a while, just been working on other things. ASCII Pong is overdue for another release (from a development point of view, not time), and EmmWon is finally compiling but not yet working. I hope to have the latter working soon, and I'm very excited about it. However, I know that people only really care about No Name MAME so I'm gonna get back on that.
Title: Re:No Name MAME Question
Post by: Silver on September 22, 2004, 04:26:48 am
Well I'd suggest its a case of what's the easiest approach in the long run.... It might be a case of extra work now in the short term allowing less work in the future keeping up to date, vs sticking with the code and coming to more stress later on.....

Has alll the big recent changes in mame (ie input system) messed with a lot of the noname code? if it has then maybe start afresh?

Either way, You'll be very popular!!

Title: Re:No Name MAME Question
Post by: Lilwolf on September 22, 2004, 09:41:35 am
I can't answer one way or the other without knowing the current problems.

I used nonamemame as a more updated version of analog+ with some extra features.  And I don't know if analog+ mame works with the latest control changes.  (The games I use haven't been updated... so running old version of analog+).

I would say, give yourself a timeline.... And see if you can get the current working (or moving in the right direction).  You should probably find out soon if you are moving in the right direction or not.

I would personally LOVE to see someone do a good job on seperating diffs that work together myself.  A single place to add the features that you want.  So if you start over, I would LOVE it if you went in seperated diffs that all work together.  
Title: Re:No Name MAME Question
Post by: JoyMonkey on September 22, 2004, 10:51:09 am
Ooo! Ooo! Could you incorporate the -wavwrite command into NoName at some stage? It was added in .84 and allows you to output all the sound of a game to a wav file.

Now if only there was an easy way to put the 'record to avi' feature back into Mame32...
Title: Re:No Name MAME Question
Post by: TheGatesofBill on September 22, 2004, 03:10:46 pm
Its been a while since I've nosed through the code, but I seem to remember that Analog+ beging the cause of most of the problems. As for seperatig the diffs, I'm not quite sure what you mean. And any features in the current version of the official MAME will of course be added. And yes, the input system changes are a huge pain in the tail with No Name MAME, and I will have to update the drivers I've added one at a time. I would appreciate if someone would step up to lend a hand, but I doubt they will. Anyways, I think I've answered all the questions. Oh, and I'm currently leaning towards starting over with whatever the latest version of MAME is (I can't keep up).
Title: Re:No Name MAME Question
Post by: u_rebelscum on September 22, 2004, 04:11:07 pm
I'm about ready to put up a driver-features-only version of Analog+.  

I'm still working (slowly) on the core input stuff, though.  The core-OS input interface was really cleaned up a lot with mame's input changes for the better.  I'm having to redo it from start, while trying to merge as much as I can from the old code.

If that helps your decision.
Title: Re:No Name MAME Question
Post by: Buddabing on September 22, 2004, 07:36:26 pm
I'm going to vote for start over.

I think that, with a little more work, you could get a version of NoName that was configurable. That is, the user could select what mods he/she wants, and the patches would apply automatically.

Most of the GNU projects have some kind of configure script that helps with cross-compatibility. You could do something like that for NoName.

I hope you decide to include my controls artwork display code (http://home.houston.rr.com/buddabing/PATCH086.ZIP) in NoName.
Title: Re:No Name MAME Question
Post by: TheGatesofBill on September 22, 2004, 08:32:26 pm
Buddabing, I was definately thinking about that if I start over. It would be a bit more work, but it would likely be worth it. Of course the person would need to be able to compile things themself to take advantage of it. And don't worry, your patch has been on my todo list for quite some time.

u_rebelscum, I may just wait until you have something else and than work off that. After all, it is mostly your stuff that is broken. :P