Sorry maybe I should've done some more experimenting before I posted this. It does work, I thought it would delete it for ALL my families though.

Thanks for clearing it up though.

I'm posting this here, because I don't know if it is a bug or not; or if there are already any plans to change it. Also it's more of a change than a feature request.

The issue I have with family variables is as follows:

If you have 2 sprite objects for example; and you give one a private variable; then you give this object a family, say blue; then you make the second object part of the blue family; construct makes you give the second object the private variable of the first object. This variable now counts as a family variable.

This seems badly organised. What I'd like is an object to be able to have it's own values, and the values of its families all separate.

The problem really arises when you need lots of Families with variables, and some objects belong to multiple families. In this case all the objects would end up having all the same values, most of which would be completely redundant. Not to mention that none of these objects can even have their own private variables.

So you have an enemy in the enemies family, and he has private variables telling him when he can move//whatever, then ALL enemies have to have these values assigned to them, whether they move in the same way or not. Also if he is in the takes damage family, EVERYTHING that takes damage, not only has all the variables attached to it that an enemy does, but also all the variables for the original enemy that moves about.

Family variables should be listed in the properties tree, either under the family name, OR, the family name and its variables should be listed under private variables.

Basically what I'm saying is that family variables should be tied to a specific family, and not just be counted as a family variable when one of the objects in a family has that variable.

I just don't want all my objects to have about 50 variables when they only need 5.

It's quite a subtle point so I hope I've explained it well enough heh.

This already exists: FormatDecimal(Value, # of decimal places)

The fruityloops were annoying.

Also it's really hard, you should order the level selection by difficulty or at least give them some difficulty rating or something.

Would be cool if you made it save your time for each level too.

It's pretty cool though.

do you want an object with a higher Z to always be on top of one with a lower Z regardless of Y value, and only sort it by Y value if Z is equal

surely you can just do (pretty much what Ashley said)

for each object ordered by .y+.z*9999999999999999999999999

Yeah sorry that example won't really help you if the code is the same, I kindof assumed the lag was all down to 360000 iterations, not actually testing it at 600. Turns out it's still laggy at that many.

you'll want to test if the editbox = zeropad(computer.value('code'),4)

its probably getting confused with strings and integers etc, adding the zeropad should sort things out.

Got it its working perfectly thanks alot only one thing tho, where would I put an event to make sure the number is above 999, i have the computers set to random(9999)

You don't need to, basically thats what zeropad does

if its <1000 say like 420

then zeropad would make it 0420 so all it'll mean is the first digit is 0

Quick XAudio2 update - I've added more format support for XAudio2; a common problem with Directsound was that it only supported PCM WAVs. XAudio2 will support runtime decoding of ADPCM and xWMA WAVs. xWMA is a lightweight version of WMA specially supported by XAudio2. I'm also planning OGG support, but that will require fully decompressing the files in to memory first, but with today's computer memories, I don't think it's much important. For completeness, I'll throw in a Play MP3 action like Directsound had.

wooo ogg support... good news!

I suppose you can use UID's but I usually find it easier, when placing loads of objects in the layout, to just set the initial values manually for each object. It's very easy to change, and very simple. It can get very confusing when using UID's to know what object goes with what in the layout editor.

I made an example for you: http://www.quotecats.com/what/computercode.cap

You know the objects with the same ID value go together. So if a computer has ID 1 it will go with boxes with ID 1. You set this in the layout editor, making it really easy to see what you're doing.

Similarly you have to set the boxes initial digit value to determine which of the 4 digits you want. (It's probably possible with a little more tinkering to make the computer able to handle codes of arbitrary length, only if you need it though as it'd make it more complex.)

Surely you only need one for each loop there, are you using a compare in the system object instead of a compare private variable on the sprite?

so you'd have:

for each ship:

Turret value 'UIDofparent' = Ships.UID

did you try this?

I made an example for you:

http://www.quotecats.com/what/spaceshipturrets.cap

It only uses one for each object loop to set the positions, so it'd be 600 iterations.

EDIT: in fact when you make it create 600 ships its ultra laggy

Did you set it up like that screenshot above? I had it working.

You also have to make sure the initial values are right:

so if you have 2 computers and 8 boxes you'd have as initial values

COMPUTER1: ID=0 Code=0

BOX1: ID=0 Digit=1

BOX2: ID=0 Digit=2

BOX3: ID=0 Digit=3

BOX4: ID=0 Digit=4

COMPUTER2: ID=1 Code=0

BOX5: ID=1 Digit=1

BOX6: ID=1 Digit=2

BOX7: ID=1 Digit=3

BOX8: ID=1 Digit=4

MORE COMPUTERS - just change the ID values.

The initial digit value corresponds to which digit that box will display (ie Digit=1 means it will display 1st)