MT1.3b90.01 Pathfinder + D&D3.5 Framework

Discussion concerning lmarkus' campaign framework for D&D3.x and Pathfinder.

Moderators: dorpond, trevor, Azhrei, giliath, Gamerdude, jay, Mr.Ice, lmarkus001

Forum rules
Discussion regarding lmarkus001's framework only. Other posts deleted without notice! :)
Elorebaen
Dragon
Posts: 364
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 5:37 pm

Re: MT1.3b90.01 Pathfinder + D&D3.5 Framework (RELEASED)

Post by Elorebaen »

lmarkus001 wrote:
Elorebaen wrote:LM,

I have noticed that the attack dialog macro takes about 5 seconds. Is that just me? THanks!


Could you elucidate a little? Are you talking about launching the old attack Dialog, the current attack Frame, or the time it takes to get results after pressing Attack or OK? When you do an attack, where you including an active mod toggle or just a generic weapon attack?

EDIT: I brought it up on a rather slow tablet/PC I have and I see what you are saying. After pressing OK from the dialog there is about a 5 sec delay, and it is more like 8 sec from ATTACK on the frame. I will poke about and see if there are some performance enhancements to be readily found.

This latest release set has a major rewrite of the attack macro (the lion share I took from Aliasmask). It is no where near as lean as the old macro, but is way more flexible and provides much nicer output.


Sorry LM. Using f2 (old attack dialog). From the moment I press f2 to the point where it comes up. When I was trying this it was on a map with a bunch of tokens. THank you for looking into it!

User avatar
lmarkus001
Great Wyrm
Posts: 1862
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 12:30 am
Location: Layfayette Hill, PA

Re: MT1.3b90.01 Pathfinder + D&D3.5 Framework (RELEASED)

Post by lmarkus001 »

Whoa! Just ran a test by trying to bring up the attack dialog on the PF Summoned Critters map (LOTS of tokens there).
Prepare Dialog: 40.201 s
Ouch!

So clearly the new range+elevation code is less than sprightly! On the plus side, the attack frame came right up and ran normally. This is because it only calculates ranges to up to two targets you select, instead of getting ranges to every single target on the map.

I will look into speeding up that bit of code, here is hoping...

EDIT Update: Ok, it is NOT the range+elevation code... it is the json.sort patch! :-( It only took 4.742sec to calculate ranges to the 343 tokens on the map. But then it took 34.445 seconds to sort that information! Ick!

Pre Get: 0.125 s
Post Get: 4.867 s
Post Sort: 39.312 s
Prepare Dialog: 39.811 s

WOOOO! Ok, changing to Maptool 1.3.b91 and getting rid of the lib:fixB90 library (json.sort) makes a MASSIVE difference...

Pre Get: 0.14 s
Post Get: 1.045 s
Post Sort: 1.061 s
Prepare Dialog: 1.154 s

BAM!

Elorebaen
Dragon
Posts: 364
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 5:37 pm

Re: MT1.3b90.01 Pathfinder + D&D3.5 Framework (RELEASED)

Post by Elorebaen »

lmarkus001 wrote:Whoa! Just ran a test by trying to bring up the attack dialog on the PF Summoned Critters map (LOTS of tokens there).
Prepare Dialog: 40.201 s
Ouch!

So clearly the new range+elevation code is less than sprightly! On the plus side, the attack frame came right up and ran normally. This is because it only calculates ranges to up to two targets you select, instead of getting ranges to every single target on the map.

I will look into speeding up that bit of code, here is hoping...


I had a feeling it may be related to the other tokens on the map. Thanks for investigating!

User avatar
lmarkus001
Great Wyrm
Posts: 1862
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 12:30 am
Location: Layfayette Hill, PA

Re: MT1.3b90.01 Pathfinder + D&D3.5 Framework (RELEASED)

Post by lmarkus001 »

I updated my previous message. Bottom line is, use b91 and get rid of lib:fixB90 library token and you will go ZOOOM!

User avatar
aliasmask
Deity
Posts: 8596
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:11 pm
Location: Bay Area

Re: MT1.3b90.01 Pathfinder + D&D3.5 Framework (RELEASED)

Post by aliasmask »

The distance code isn't very heavy and is used in the statsheet popup. I used that to test the speed. It takes like 3 seconds to get the ranges of 109 tokens on the summon map. Although, this is slower than I would like, it's nowhere near the 40 seconds you got. you could probably speed it up by integrating getRangeDistance() in to code directly instead of calling the function. Since the source never changes, it could make a small difference since calling a function is extra time as well.

edit: Ah, I see your edit now.

Elorebaen
Dragon
Posts: 364
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 5:37 pm

Re: MT1.3b90.01 Pathfinder + D&D3.5 Framework (RELEASED)

Post by Elorebaen »

lmarkus001 wrote:I updated my previous message. Bottom line is, use b91 and get rid of lib:fixB90 library token and you will go ZOOOM!


Great to hear! Which b91 are you using?

User avatar
lmarkus001
Great Wyrm
Posts: 1862
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 12:30 am
Location: Layfayette Hill, PA

Re: MT1.3b90.01 Pathfinder + D&D3.5 Framework (RELEASED)

Post by lmarkus001 »

Elorebaen wrote:Great to hear! Which b91 are you using?


Sigh LoL. This question is why I have avoided changing from b87.

I am using the b91 that Wolf42 is including in the link to download b90. What is worse is when you run this b91, it shows as b90. There is no quick way to see that it is the new b90 (b91). I have also linked to it in the entry post of this thread. I have also done very rudimentary testing under the b89p_Nerps! variant build and my framework functionality seems to be intact. For both the b89p_Nerps! and the b91-that-is-the-new-b90 I remove the library that "fixes" json.sort.

Confused yet? And now you see why I was hoping we would get a "good" Maptool final release before Azhrei had to move on.

Elorebaen
Dragon
Posts: 364
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 5:37 pm

Re: MT1.3b90.01 Pathfinder + D&D3.5 Framework (RELEASED)

Post by Elorebaen »

lmarkus001 wrote:
Elorebaen wrote:Great to hear! Which b91 are you using?


Sigh LoL. This question is why I have avoided changing from b87.

I am using the b91 that Wolf42 is including in the link to download b90. What is worse is when you run this b91, it shows as b90. There is no quick way to see that it is the new b90 (b91). I have also linked to it in the entry post of this thread. I have also done very rudimentary testing under the b89p_Nerps! variant build and my framework functionality seems to be intact. For both the b89p_Nerps! and the b91-that-is-the-new-b90 I remove the library that "fixes" json.sort.

Confused yet? And now you see why I was hoping we would get a "good" Maptool final release before Azhrei had to move on.


Thanks for the head's up! No problem, I understand the state of things :)

Post Reply

Return to “D&D 3.5/Pathfinder 1e Campaign Macros”