RPD a écrit:

this would be easy if people respected logical spacing. But people are dumb and call tf TF and P p, and too much other shit, so they wont respect this neither.

So, you have to teach them what is the difference between X and Y

Your tool has no instructions, it's really hard to use for a newfag ;_;
(maybe because it's the Alpha mode ?)

Well, its complicated. ATM it wont have instructions, and maybe not even in beta v.
I didnt thought about instructions, but standards (informal notation has not the same "instructions" than formal notation, and not even through boards. In UPSB the PD : thing fel said is never used)

Also, most times that i bitch about how stupid the user is, is just to relieve stress. If the user knew how to perfectly breakdown, the program wont be necessary anymore...

BTW:)

RPD a écrit:

QUESTION -> How should i proccess this?

12[fc 12] - 23 - 34 - 12 [fc 23]

so there i have an specific fc and a general one. I should translate that into this

12[fc 12; 23] - 23[fc 23] - 34[fc 23] - 12[fc 23]

or just erase the general one and give an error?

Anyone help with this please?

fake double > sonic rev 1-2 1-3 > pass 1-3 3-4 > infinity > TA t-1 1-p > swiwel p-1 2-3 > pass 2-3 t-2 > charge t-2 > neo sonic rev t-2 2-3 > twisted sonic bust 1.5

can your tool correct the slots here ?

also :

sonic 23-12 > sonic 23-12

correct this ?

Citation :

fake double > sonic rev 1-2 1-3 > pass 1-3 3-4 > infinity > TA t-1 1-p > swiwel p-1 2-3 > pass 2-3 t-2 > charge t-2 > neo sonic rev t-2 2-3 > twisted sonic bust 1.5

D:

Citation :

sonic 23-12 > sonic 23-12

Nice idea. I'll fix this kind of problems when I start with cont. tricks.

Now. More parsing questions...

Should I parse sonic rev 1-2 1-3 as
sonic rev 12-13
sonic rev 1-2-1-3
sonic rev 1-2

Should I parse sonic 23-12 ~ sonic 23-12 as double sonic?

Should I parse PD sonic 23-12 > PS sonic 23-12 as double sonic?

Should I parse sonic 23-12 > sonic 23-12 as sonic 23-12 > fingerswitch 12-23 > sonic 23-12 because they dont start and finish in the same slot?

AAAND the old question :C

RPD a écrit:

QUESTION -> How should i proccess this?

12[fc 12] - 23 - 34 - 12 [fc 23]

so there i have an specific fc and a general one. I should translate that into this

12[fc 12; 23] - 23[fc 23] - 34[fc 23] - 12[fc 23]

or just erase the general one and give an error?

Ideas for these? ^^

nyan

It has been difficult this time. Fingercrossings are such a big problem with my little knowledge. But i tried.

So meh, i upload the beta prerelease since I wont be able to do so much in some days. Exams.

Changelog:
Fixed (PD) [PD] PD : (PD-PS) [PD-PS] PD-PS : issues
First try of understanding general fc syntax [fc 12] [fc 12;23] general and specific crossings
Fixed simultaneous tricks linking issues
New design
Minor fixes

DL - http://www.mediafire.com/download/psti1x3nu2i64vb/breakdowns_beta_prerelease.html

As before, try to mess a bit with the new and old features. Bugs are not difficult to see :3

just was thinking about this, and another doubt came to my mind
Sometimes we notate tricks with more slots than the initial ones. ex:

flush sonic 23-14-23

which is only one flush sonic. but in other tricks

pass 23-14-23

those are 2 passes linked together. that equals to pass 23-14 > pass 14-23

So... pass 23-14-23 is incorrectly notated, right?

EDIT - Fel, about the fingercrossing tag you mentioned. you mean that
12[fc 12] - 23 - 12 = 12[fc 12] - 23 - 12

but

12[fc 12] - 23 - 12[/fc 12] = 12[fc 12] - 23[fc 12] - 12[fc 12]

that may be quite confusing, because the end tag is giving the start tag a new meaning

RPD a écrit:

So... pass 23-14-23 is incorrectly notated, right?

hum, good question. I always avoided "flush sonic 23-14-23" and used "pass 12-23-34" as a contraction of "pass 12-23 > pass 23-34". But the contrary would be very useful.
Solutions :
- use brackets () for intermediate slots (flush sonic 23-(14)-23)
- two hyphens -- to mean "the same trick again" (pass 12-23--34) or ">" (pass 12-23>34).

The last way is the coolest for me as it could be interpreted like two tricks : pass 12-23 and the trick "34". This is how to read such a trick :
When a trick has no name, it means "take the name of the previous trick". And when it has only one slot, it would mean "use the previous ending slot as a beginning slot". So "34" means actually "pass 23-34"

What about that ?

Citation :

that may be quite confusing, because the end tag is giving the start tag a new meaning

that's why I differentiated the tag with "start".
You added an interesting idea : this tag could affect a series of tricks, but also a series of slots. (so it could be global and local)

fel2spaths a écrit:

RPD a écrit:

So... pass 23-14-23 is incorrectly notated, right?

hum, good question. I always avoided "flush sonic 23-14-23" and used "pass 12-23-34" as a contraction of "pass 12-23 > pass 23-34". But the contrary would be very useful.
Solutions :
- use brackets () for intermediate slots (flush sonic 23-(14)-23)
- two hyphens -- to mean "the same trick again" (pass 12-23--34) or ">" (pass 12-23>34).

I like the brackets one :3
the two (hyphens or dashes? i dont know the actual difference :C ) are actually parsed as a >, because some people use them as a trick linker. Same with -> and * (only if its not towards a slot)

fel2spaths a écrit:

The last way is the coolest for me as it could be interpreted like two tricks : pass 12-23 and the trick "34". This is how to read such a trick :
When a trick has no name, it means "take the name of the previous trick". And when it has only one slot, it would mean "use the previous ending slot as a beginning slot". So "34" means actually "pass 23-34"

What about that ?

You have released the kraken, because thats the most difficult part of the code dear fel
I explain you the basic tree of the program


but, how do i guess all the values for a trick that has no information? here is the question. I thought about giving 3-4 options to the user, so he can configure it, otherwise it would be too difficult.

For example, some ways of completing the trick you said there

pass 12-23>34

12-23 for the first trick and 23-34 for the second one
12-23 for the first trick, 34 for the second one (remember that some tricks, like shadow still or charge have only 1 slot, not starting and finishing one) and a fingerswitch between both tricks, because they dont start and end in the same slots
naming the second trick a fingerswitch because it has no name (is the actual preset my code uses)

that would leave 3 outputs

pass 12-23 > pass 23-34 (the one you like)
pass 12-23 > fingerswitch 23-34 > pass 34 (the one without sense because passes have start and end slots)
pass 12-23 > fingerswitch 23-34 (the one my code likes :v )

fel2spaths a écrit:

Citation :

that may be quite confusing, because the end tag is giving the start tag a new meaning

that's why I differentiated the tag with "start".
You added an interesting idea : this tag could affect a series of tricks, but also a series of slots. (so it could be global and local)

we could give different meanings for fc and fx (but it would be confusing because now they are the same) It would be something like this

FC:
In a specific way -> modifies only one slot, the one that is before it
In a general way -> modifies all slots in the trick, no exception

FX:
In a specific way -> modifies the slot before it, and it says to the program to expect a [/fx] modifier. It would affect all slots between both modifiers
In a general way -> it has no sense using it

Or, we could just mix both. Easier for the user, maybe more confusing for my code

FC and FX:
In a specific way -> modifies the slot before it, and it says to the program to expect a [/fx] modifier. It would affect all slots between both modifiers
In a general way -> modifies all slots in the trick, no exception

RPD a écrit:

pass 12-23 > pass 23-34 (the one you like)
pass 12-23 > fingerswitch 23-34 > pass 34 (the one without sense because passes have start and end slots)
pass 12-23 > fingerswitch 23-34 (the one my code likes :v )

That's not a problem and you know it.

Citation :

FC and FX:
In a specific way -> modifies the slot before it, and it says to the program to expect a [/fx] modifier. It would affect all slots between both modifiers
In a general way -> modifies all slots in the trick, no exception

Wait. If you want it to last one slot it makes :
Sonic 23[fx T1][/fxT1]-12
?

*out of the blue*
Wouldn't it be easier to write fingercrosses with a trick "cross" and an "uncross" when it ends ?
If the fingercrossing occurs while another trick is being done, it could be written by "trick + cross / uncross" (adding of course which fingercross it is), and otherwise we would consider "cross" as a normal trick, like in the tablature notation.

Mh, that's not crazy ... And if a fingercross is done during the trick, just use "+" (simultaneous) notation !

edit : wooops

Yep, that's a very good idea =D

Patchwork a écrit:

*out of the blue*
Wouldn't it be easier to write fingercrosses with a trick "cross" and an "uncross" when it ends ?

I think that I get what you mean but... any examples?

Patchwork a écrit:

If the fingercrossing occurs while another trick is being done, it could be written by "trick + cross / uncross" (adding of course which fingercross it is), and otherwise we would consider "cross" as a normal trick, like in the tablature notation.

i used something like this time ago, and now i dont see it really useful. I prefer actual system for doing that.

What he suggests is to use the current system for local fingercrossing and the one he mentioned for global fingercrossing

Lol global fcs are not the problem. It just affects the whole trick. No moar discussion.

Yes moar discussion è.é
But forget my last post, I was mistaken.

Actually, his idea is to replace :
[fx 12] Sonic > TA > [/fx 12] Pass
with :
cross 12 > Sonic > TA > uncross 12 > Pass.

With a + if simultaneous, obviously.

fel2spaths a écrit:

Actually, his idea is to replace :
[fx 12] Sonic > TA > [/fx 12] Pass
with :
cross 12 > Sonic > TA > uncross 12 > Pass.

With a + if simultaneous, obviously.

Totally informal notation. But it seems quite fine for me 8D
Even thinking that it makes no sense in formal notation. Basically because fingercrossings are not a trick, but slot modifiers

BTW, then what method should we use for parsing slots fel?

flush sonic 23-(34)-23
or
pass 23-12>12

And if we use the last one, which I think that is the one we've chosen. Which of the 2 main slots in a trick is the inherited one? Nigga examples
nigga 23-12 > nigga 34
nigga 34 > nigga 23-12
nigga 23-12 > nigga 34 > nigga 23-12

in the first example, end slot is inherited to be the start slot. But in the second one, the start slot of the second trick is inherited to be the end slot of the first one. And in the last example, you have 4 ways of parsing it (may be obvious for you, but when you have to program this its a bit more complicated D: )

nigga 23-12 > nigga 12-34 > fingerswitch 34-23 > nigga 23-12
nigga 23-12 > fingerswitch 12-34 > nigga 34-23 > nigga 23-12
nigga 23-12 > nigga 12-34-23 > nigga 23-12
nigga 23-12 > fingerswitch 12-34 > nigga 34> fingerswitch 34-23 > nigga 23-12

Even thinking that it makes no sense in formal notation. Basically because fingercrossings are not a trick, but slot modifiers.

True. I thinked about it.
but fingercross can also be a trick :
pass rev 12-23 > cross 23 > ringaround 23-23

Thanks for explaining Fel <3
I do consider "cross" as a trick. It can be done with or without mod, but it is an action, not a slot modifier.

And for the end, my opinion (you're free not to give a shit about it) is that 12-23>34 is not clear at all. I don't fully understand it, and actually I don't see the interest of this notation, whereas the brackets are really intuitive to me, and useful for strange hybrids.
But why would you have to choose between both ?

Citation :

Totally informal notation. But it seems quite fine for me 8D
Even thinking that it makes no sense in formal notation. Basically because fingercrossings are not a trick, but slot modifiers

Yeah, I agree that crossing isn't a trick, as well as PD/PS/PU.
What about the compromise : "nigga > [cross 12] > nigga" ? The absence of trick means it's a during fingercrossing.

Citation :

flush sonic 23-(34)-23
or
pass 23-12>12

As patchwork said, why not both.
If someone writes "12-23-34", let's consider he wanted to use brackets (the most intuitive I guess)

RPD a écrit:

nigga 23-12 > nigga 34
nigga 34 > nigga 23-12
nigga 23-12 > nigga 34 > nigga 23-12

According to what I said, it is :

nigga 23-12 > nigga 12-34
nigga 34-34 (if there's no trick before) > fingerswitch 34-23 > nigga 23-12
nigga 23-12 > nigga 12-34 > fingerswitch 34-23 > nigga 23-12

But I don't like fingerswitches, so I prefer :

nigga 23-12 > nigga 12-34
nigga 34-34 (if there's no trick before) > nigga 34-23 > nigga 23-12
nigga 23-12 > nigga 12-34 > nigga 34-23 > nigga 23-12

see why ?

Citation :

And for the end, my opinion (you're free not to give a shit about it) is that 12-23>34 is not clear at all. I don't fully understand it, and actually I don't see the interest of this notation, whereas the brackets are really intuitive to me, and useful for strange hybrids.

Oh, it's only a way to shorten a breakdown. If someone does a full pass normal combo, you just have to write :
pass 23-12>34>T1>T4>23>T1>13
(if you followed what I said up above, it's possible to write : pass 23-12>34-T1>T4-23>T1-13)

OK. Why not both? :3
I mean, we can still differ between formal and informal notation. Informal is the easiest way of notating it, formal a more difficult one but more specific too .

Informal fcs:
Cross is considered a trick, and so on can be linked normally ">" or simultaneously if it starts/ends in the middle of a trick "+"
It doesn't make sense to hybrid cross/uncross tricks, because fingers are either crossed or uncrossed, no mid term
The only modifiers that they can have are hand position and slot modifiers (which are the fingers crossed.)

Formal fcs:
All what I explained before, about specific and general ones. Here fcs are considered modifiers and not tricks (not only slot modifiers, they can also be push modifiers, ex: MA [p fc 32] )
The uncross modifier can be either /fc or /fx
This notation lets you say when the fc starts or ends, the exact slot, something that the other doesn't let, but its not necessary because its informal notation

Informal slots:
Slot-slot-slot for multiple tricks
Slot-(slot)-slot for one trick

Formal slots:
Slot-slot-slot and
slot-slot>slot for multiple tricks
Slot-(slot)-slot for one trick

Also, thought a bit more how to expand push modifier in formal notation, obv
Push:
[P Slot] when the push is made by some fingers
[P *] push is gravity
[P fl] for fingerless pushes
[P handPosition-handPosition] when the trick push is a hand position change
[P fc] when the push is because of the fingercross pressure. Its not the same:
MA [fc 32] [p 2]
MA [fc 32] [p fc 32]

Everybody agrees? Should we make an informal notation version for push modifier? C:

I'm happy with that.
Just :
- You don't explain how to differenciate "one-use" and "during" fingercrossings in the formal notation
- slot-slot-slot = slot-(slot)-slot is better for me

About slot inherit shit



you cant duplicate a trick. if you have 3 niggas, you can't end with 4 niggas. (If the parsing lasted 9 months, then you could end with 3 niggas and 1 little nigga, but thats another story (?) )

Example with a trick that is still by default:


Here, the way of linking this is with fingerswitches (passes in this case)
I also dont like fingerswitches because they give no information, but the user is giving no information about what is happening between those tricks. (?)

Example with a trick that is not still by default:


maybe some tricks can be duplicated. Like Arounds, spins, passes and fingerswitches (again :3 )
Also, in some cases, fingerswitches are needed. For example



here we dont need them but what if



How the fuck does the code know that the RA is double (one full and another 0.5) to pass 2 times by 34? This is solved with fswitches


About the new shit:

Citation :

- You don't explain how to differenciate "one-use" and "during" fingercrossings in the formal notation

If fingercrossings in formal notation are modifiers for a single trick (not like cont modifiers like nigga > cont [ sonic > charge] x3) there is no need to specify if the fc is specific or "less specific" I mean:

nigga 23-(23[fc 23])-(34)-(12)-23

fc 23 would apply only for second slot 23

nigga 23-(23[fc 23])-(34)-(12)-23[/fc 23]

fc 23 applies for all slots except first one

But what if we say that fc modifiers can be inherited (again :C ) from tricks to tricks? another awful thing to parse. 2 more examples

nigga 23-(23[fc 23])-(34)-(12)-23 > nigga 23-(23)-(34)-(12)-23

fc 23 would apply only for second slot 23 in the first trick. Second trick doesnt change

nigga 23-(23[fc 23])-(34)-(12)-23 > nigga 23-(23[/fc 23])-(34)-(12)-23

fc 23 applies for slots from second slot of first trick to second slot of second trick. Second trick IS changing.

Citation :

- slot-slot-slot = slot-(slot)-slot is better for me

Hm, do you say that you prefer

Citation :

Formal slots:
Slot-slot-slot for one trick
slot-slot>slot for multiple tricks
Slot-(slot)-slot has no use Ü

over

Citation :

Formal slots:
Slot-slot-slot and
slot-slot>slot for multiple tricks
Slot-(slot)-slot for one trick

if you say so, then what about

Citation :

And for the end, my opinion (you're free not to give a shit about it) is that 12-23>34 is not clear at all. I don't fully understand it, and actually I don't see the interest of this notation, whereas the brackets are really intuitive to me, and useful for strange hybrids.

(?)

We could give different meanings for each way in informal and formal, but then, the user should be saying which notation standard is using. Something that he is not going to do, obviously.

EDIT - Damn longest post ever. Have fun reading it :3

RPD a écrit:

About slot inherit shit

nigga 23-12 > nigga 34 > nigga 23-12
vv
nigga 23-12 > nigga 12-34 > fingerswitch 34-23 > nigga 23-12
vv
nigga 23-12 > nigga 12-34 > nigga 34-23 > nigga 23-12

you cant duplicate a trick. if you have 3 niggas, you can't end with 4 niggas.

My version :
if you have 3 incomplete niggas, you're forced to add a trick. So let it be a nigga.

Citation :

(If the parsing lasted 9 months, then you could end with 3 niggas and 1 little nigga, but thats another story (?) )

I thought you only needed 2 niggas, but I'm not an expert in niggas

Citation :

Example with a trick that is still by default:

flush sonic 23 > flush sonic 34 > flush sonic 23
vv
flush sonic 23-34 > flush sonic 34-23 > flush sonic 23-23

Here, the way of linking this is with fingerswitches (passes in this case)
I also dont like fingerswitches because they give no information, but the user is giving no information about what is happening between those tricks. (?)

We decided on skype to put a pass

Citation :

Example with a trick that is not still by default:

tw sonic 23 > tw sonic 34 > tw sonic 23
vv
tw sonic 23-34 > tw sonic 34-23 > tw sonic 23-12

If you only have "tw sonic 23" at the beginning, you code lacks information and is supposed to crash.

Citation :

maybe some tricks can be duplicated. Like Arounds, spins, passes and fingerswitches (again :3 )
Also, in some cases, fingerswitches are needed. For example

MA 23-23 > RA 34 > MA 23
vv
MA 23-(23)-34 > RA 34-23 > MA 23-12

NOOO ;_;
MA 23-(23)-34 makes no sense, since 23 is not an intermediate slot
it makes MA 23-23 > RA 23-34 > MA 34-23

Citation :

here we dont need them but what if

MA 23-23 > RA 34-34 > MA 23
vv
MA 23-(23)-34 > DOUBLE RA 34-(34)-23 > MA 23-12

Ok, I let you the pass here (but the best would be pass rev ;_ any solutions ?

Citation :

How the fuck does the code know that the RA is double (one full and another 0.5) to pass 2 times by 34? This is solved with fswitches

MA 23-23 > RA 34-34 > MA 23
vv
MA 23-(23)-34 > RA 34-34 > fswitch 34-23 > MA 23-12

About the new shit:

Citation :

- You don't explain how to differenciate "one-use" and "during" fingercrossings in the formal notation

If fingercrossings in formal notation are modifiers for a single trick (not like cont modifiers like nigga > cont [ sonic > charge] x3) there is no need to specify if the fc is specific or "less specific" I mean:

nigga 23-(23[fc 23])-(34)-(12)-23

fc 23 would apply only for second slot 23

nigga 23-(23[fc 23])-(34)-(12)-23[/fc 23]

fc 23 applies for all slots except first one

But what if we say that fc modifiers can be inherited (again :C ) from tricks to tricks? another awful thing to parse. 2 more examples

nono that's too complicated. Informal version was very good answer to this problem.

Citation :

nigga 23-(23[fc 23])-(34)-(12)-23 > nigga 23-(23)-(34)-(12)-23

fc 23 would apply only for second slot 23 in the first trick. Second trick doesnt change

nigga 23-(23[fc 23])-(34)-(12)-23 > nigga 23-(23[/fc 23])-(34)-(12)-23

fc 23 applies for slots from second slot of first trick to second slot of second trick. Second trick IS changing.

Citation :

- slot-slot-slot = slot-(slot)-slot is better for me

Hm, do you say that you prefer

Citation :

Formal slots:
Slot-slot-slot for one trick
slot-slot>slot for multiple tricks
Slot-(slot)-slot has no use Ü

over

Citation :

Formal slots:
Slot-slot-slot and
slot-slot>slot for multiple tricks
Slot-(slot)-slot for one trick

if you say so, then what about

Citation :

And for the end, my opinion (you're free not to give a shit about it) is that 12-23>34 is not clear at all. I don't fully understand it, and actually I don't see the interest of this notation, whereas the brackets are really intuitive to me, and useful for strange hybrids.

(?)

We could give different meanings for each way in informal and formal

nono, both would mean invisible brackets

Citation :

, but then, the user should be saying which notation standard is using. Something that he is not going to do, obviously.

EDIT - Damn longest post ever. Have fun reading it :3

I did

YOLO

sup potato ?

Reprogramming dis shiz in java. That way it'll be much better organised for me and the engine could be used in other projects such as a combo generator, since the objects used are the same (trick, combo, etc...)

still... the alpha version of it will need time. Sorry D:

(PD: if you are really interested in the project seith, fel and I usually discuss about how some things should be parsed. so you can join the conversation @skype ! )

When my laptop will be here, I go join this conversation (I also program)