Messages

1. Windows 7
2. Yes, final year student majoring in Software Development.

to do this you would probably need to modify the AI that controls hauling to storage. You would probably need to add a check that it is then using a hopper (or else it would affect any storage building) which may be a problem for dynamically changing it for modded hoppers.

and I thought it looked good when it was just line art. Looks amazing!

pretty sure that would just be an issue due to rimworld being fullscreen. If you had it on windowed mode that should be fine (I think, may be entirely wrong here).
As for having dual monitor support, that'd be cool.

Could you possibly just set the dogs he's texture to be the entire dog/not have a visible texture for the body? Thus not need to remake the bed class. No idea what errors this might lead to, but it might work... Maybe.

A muffalo that fallows you around like a pet

Highly doubt that will be doable from just XML. Pets would be cool though... and then to put them to work!

very very impressive. Super nice mod!

variables used in foreach loops and the like are renamed to 'current', unsure if this affects other variables that are declared inside methods or not. Point being, some variables are renamed.
What can also be a big problem is the stuff that doesn't get decompiled well, for example switch case statements get rather mangled by the decompilation, due to how the compiler reorganises them to be more efficient (but vastly less understandable).

Not saying it's good at all, if somebody has greatcode anybody could steal it.:/
and claim it as theirs.

This can happen regardless of the case. You can take some decompiled code from another assembly and transplant it on your own, and nobody would ever suspect it (until they look closer).

It does become a lot easier with source code though.

well decompilers open stuff in like one second so Nope

Are you actually saying that decompiled code is as easy to understand/copy as original source code that has comments, structure, meaningful names in loops etc etc (not to mention parts which don't decompile properly)? If decompiled code was as good as source code, this whole post wouldn't have a point, cause including source wouldn't matter. The point is, it that there is some difference between source code and decompiled code.

This should happen, it would mean better mods.

I don't know if I agree with that entirely. If people want to make better mods they shouldn't do it by just copying the work other people have done. Sure, people can help new modders with showing them how to solve a problem that has been solved previously, but this is very different from saying that stealing code is good as it leads to better mods.

if its an eclipse you will use stored power from the batteries. If its a solar flare the idea is it disables all the electronics, including the batteries.

Not exactly correct, they will fry every CONNECTION even the small one from lamps/Comms etc. to the main power lines

My point was that the solar flare effectively affects the batteries, which the OP was suggesting it shouldn't. As for whether it doesn't disable the batteries, but instead everything that uses/connects to power isn't of real importance (unless I am missing some implication?).

Not saying it's good at all, if somebody has greatcode anybody could steal it.:/
and claim it as theirs.

This can happen regardless of the case. You can take some decompiled code from another assembly and transplant it on your own, and nobody would ever suspect it (until they look closer).

It does become a lot easier with source code though.

if its an eclipse you will use stored power from the batteries. If its a solar flare the idea is it disables all the electronics, including the batteries.

Look at the ThingMaker class, specifically methods of its that reference spawn. As for the location, you specify that when you spawn an item (rimworld effectively uses 2 axis for the positions).

Do I think including source code with mods might be nice? Yes.
Do I think you should include it? Only if you want to.
If the security of mods ever becomes a concern, including source code of mods wouldn't be the best way to fix the issue. Including source code would only stop viruses/windows hanging if there was some kind of review board that checked through all of the source code of all submitted mods (and they would need to be experienced enough to know what to look for). Or, failing this, would only help people who took the time to look through and understand the assemblies a mod use.
If you want open source as part of a way to help people learn how mods do their thing, try asking the mod maker for help. Or better yet, ask on the forums where everyone can gain the benefit of the answers that mod makers, tynan, and the community will provide. If you just want to get a feel for how stuff works in general, look at the source code tynan has provided for the core game (or just use ILSpy, it really isn't that bad most of the time).
Overall, I don't plan on releasing the source as just an open thing for any major mods that I make. If someone has a specific issue that I have solved already, chances are i'll help them out on the forums. Isn't that more useful?

you might want to change what it returns first though Otherwise you're gonna get spammed with messages about steam geysers when you try to place it not on oil.

Wait, steam geysers don't produce oil? *updates mod*