[MERGED PR] PDA Packet Sender can now make (relatively simple) Programs

[github_bot]

PULL REQUEST DETAILS

[FEATURE] [INPUT WANTED]



About the PR
I modified the Packet Sender program to include a "Toggle Program-Building Mode" button (which is a glorified way to say "show/hide some buttons"),Turning the mode on allows you to create PDA programs with the current packet.
The buttons are;
-Create Button From Current Packet - Creates a button (in the resulting program) from the current packet in the packet sender, button text is typed in by the user. The user can load the packet from the button into the packet sender or delete the button.
-Create Argument - Creates a text-field in the resulting program, with the user typing in the _Description, Text To Replace, Default Value_. Also can be deleted from the packet sender
-Create Program - This uses all the currently made buttons and arguments and puts it into a program that costs 2 disk space. Does not work if there isnt enough space. The user can type in the programs name and if to allow the user to change the frequency. The program is saved onto the PDA storage space.

Built programs use the frequency in the packet sender when it was being saved. The frequency can be changed in the program if the user allows it.
Why's this needed?
Adding this would make packets significantly easier to use on a PDA. Instead of having to rewrite your whole packet, you can now save it to a button inside of a program which saves a whole bunch of time. Also you can send your programs to the crew.

Pictures



Changelog

Code:

changelog
(u)Jimmyl
(+)The Packet Sender PDA program can now make (simple) programs with the packets

PULL REQUEST DETAILS

[cyberTripping]

This is intriguing, and I feel like it could lead to a lot of interesting stuff, but I wonder if there are any balance implications. Is there a button limit in place? I wonder if it wouldnt be possible to create a program with an argument for the network address of a door, a command, and 32 buttons that just vary in access code that you could quickly roll down to approach a similar ease of packet hacking as before access codes were added, since you wouldn't have to take the time to manually enter in the next access code every time like you do when brute forcing right now.

Edit: On closer reading, it seems you have to load from the button and then manually send the packet from there, if I'm understanding the description correctly. Maybe it wouldn't be substantially faster after all.

Edit2: I was double mistaken. Fuck.

[RikuTheKiller]

cyberTripping, you don't have to load from the button to manually send the packet, no. That's just a way to go back to a packet you made into a button. Once it is saved as a complete program, you can infact have a variable for the network address of a door and then spam the buttons from there. Though this was already possible through DWAINE scripts fairly sure with a single packet.

Edit: Just realized there is a reply function on the forums, it seems I am blind.

[cyberTripping]

cyberTripping, you don't have to load from the button to manually send the packet, no. That's just a way to go back to a packet you made into a button. Once it is saved as a complete program, you can infact have a variable for the network address of a door and then spam the buttons from there. Though this was already possible through DWAINE scripts fairly sure with a single packet.

Edit: Just realized there is a reply function on the forums, it seems I am blind.

Ah, I understand now. Yeah, I feel like it might be good if there's some sort of balancing feature in there, like a limit to buttons/arguments, or inflating filesize based on the number of saved objects, just as a trade off for the convenience of having your nerd programs saved in something as small and inconspicuous as your PDA. That being said, I'm not the most creative when it comes to packet nerdery, so I have less than zero idea on where the balance of power should actually lie.

I suppose this is an open request from me to anyone who knows what the fuck they're talking about for further input. I do really like the sound of this feature, and want to see it implemented, and that means making sure it doesn't break things too badly!

[Cal]

do not like, if people wanna do untraceable hacking with packets they can build a PC or carry a bulky laptop.

[RikuTheKiller]

do not like, if people wanna do untraceable hacking with packets they can build a PC or carry a bulky laptop.

Don't exactly get why you're first off talking about "untraceable hacking with packets" as all types of packet hacking can be traced either by packet sniffer or by the PDA packet sniffer program. Second, this is literally just a shortcut. You can already do this kind of stuff with your PDA, but it's noticeably slower and not very user-friendly. This also allows you to give others an easier time since you can send the programs as a file over messages.

TLDR: We can already run DWAINE scripts and commands using our PDAs, except significantly slower.

[Merlin1230]

Don't exactly get why you're first off talking about "untraceable hacking with packets" as all types of packet hacking can be traced either by packet sniffer or by the PDA packet sniffer program.

Sure, you can see that someone is packet hacking, but there is no way to track down where a packet was sent from or anything. You have to search the entire station and the space around it. You can ping machines and try to track it down that way, but you can set the sender value to anything, and only people experienced with packets would know how to do that.
edit: I should probably clarify that by "only people experienced with packets would know how to do that." I mean pinging, which is also only for wireless devices really.

[Spoodle]

~snip~

... You can already do this kind of stuff with your PDA, but it's noticeably slower and not very user-friendly ...

TLDR: We can already run DWAINE scripts and commands using our PDAs, except significantly slower.

I think it's fair that packets are clunky to use, given their power.

[RikuTheKiller]

~snip~

... You can already do this kind of stuff with your PDA, but it's noticeably slower and not very user-friendly ...

TLDR: We can already run DWAINE scripts and commands using our PDAs, except significantly slower.

I think it's fair that packets are clunky to use, given their power.

They aren't even THAT clunky. Like, to change from send to receive it's just a change from "send" to "recv" in the data for the script. You still need a crapton of nerd shit, custom programs etc. to even make something like that work. This just somewhat speeds up the process of doing it from your PDA. Like, while it is significantly slower right now, it's not like, stupidly slow. I can send and receive using tele commands fast enough that it's actually pretty practical and takes almost the same time as the console itself. Overall, this just makes it easier, more user-friendly and overall less of a "replace part of text" and more of a "click button thing happen". You still have to write the packets to even turn them into buttons. It's still somewhat clunky, but it's just... better.

[Sbmhawk]

I think part of the charm to it is that its so obscure, so its an exicting thing when you get something to work.

Personally, I feel like this could be a antag buy for mechanics, the same way the chemicompiler is for scientists.

[zjdtmkhzt]

I think this would be very nice to have.
A UI being clunky and/or cumbersome is not a balancing factor, if packets are op for whatever reason after this, which I doubt, they can always be rebalanced in other ways.