0ct0pu5/wesnoth
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Fixup 601c67d970

Browse source 
Turns out that commit broke TC on unit images in messages since it broke the equality
check in lua_unit.cpp. Added the XBRZ IPF as part of the Lua unit portrait attribute
instead.

I *think* this is the proper place to do it.
This commit is contained in:
Charles Dang 2018-04-17 10:15:26 +11:00
parent 77b9bc3969
commit fab229b5e8
2 changed files with 4 additions and 2 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

4
src/scripting/lua_unit.cpp
View file

@ -364,7 +364,9 @@ static int impl_unit_get(lua_State *L)
return_string_attrib("variation", u.variation());
return_bool_attrib("zoc", u.get_emit_zoc());
return_string_attrib("facing", map_location::write_direction(u.facing()));
return_string_attrib("portrait", u.big_profile() == u.absolute_image() ? u.absolute_image() + u.image_mods() : u.big_profile());
return_string_attrib("portrait", u.big_profile() == u.absolute_image()
? u.absolute_image() + u.image_mods() + "~XBRZ(2)"
: u.big_profile());
return_cfg_attrib("__cfg", u.write(cfg); u.get_location().write(cfg));
if(luaW_getmetafield(L, 1, m)) {

2
src/units/unit.cpp
View file

@ -1015,7 +1015,7 @@ std::string unit::big_profile() const
return profile_;
}
return absolute_image() + "~XBRZ(2)";
return absolute_image();
}
std::string unit::small_profile() const