DEITM049.ITM Error Options

[BeachBum]

I am in the middle of installing Big World and specifcally the Lost Crossroads Spell Pack for Baldur's Gate 2 = SpellPackB5 and am encountering an error.

When trying to install the Core Files and Graphics it fails with the following error. "DEITM049.ITM: read out of bounds".

Can anyone help resolve this.

Thanks.

[Baronius]

(2) The mod which would have failed without "ELSE 0" tried to do something with the corrupt file, which means it wanted to add/extend/modify content. In other words, modifying that file is supposed to be a feature of the mod, something which belongs to its content.

I don't understand this from a grammar POV. Do you mean that it's morally wrong for Spellpack to alter FR_ROV, or that Spellpack will have broken features?
In meaning 1, well, it's not really the fault of ELSE 0 for a morally wrong action. In meaning 2, I believe you're misunderstanding what ELSE 0 does. Generally speaking, ITM patching code looks like [..]

It's meaning 2, but with the code you've provided, it's OK (Galactygon can use that in his code). It's a code to manipulate many files of the same type, and it's reasonable to make such a process fault-tolerant (especially because it won't really affect the mod's important features if a few items won't be updated, as opposed to mods where each change is very important).

When I state that it shouldn't be used everywhere, I refer to cases when it's used to omit a feature just to suppress an installation error regardless of the importance of the omitted change. The installer's logic is "if I get a valid offset, apply the changes for this feature; if I get an invalid one (e.g. due to ELSE 0), skip this feature". For example, this is the case when an offset in a header is incorrect; the feature of the mod that needed that file will missing from the installed mod, and no one might notice it (while in case of an installation error, the problem is recognized and can be fixed).

I believe that FR_ROV was made in 2002 with some older teambg tool (not IEEP). I doubt that this type of file corruption is something you must watch out for in newer mods.

If the probability of this type of corruptions is so low, then why to ignore them? Since they don't happen often at all -- but when they do, they can possibly prevent a feature of a mod from installing if 'ELSE 0' is used -- why is it a problem to deal with those few cases (even if they result in many player reports)? In this respect, they're like disk errors: they don't happen often at all, but when they do, their effect is really undesired (= a mod's feature isn't installed and no one might notice this). That's why it's not a good practise for new modders to use "ELSE 0" everywhere to suppress errors.

On a side note, there is no problem with a lot of threads, because that is why patches can be released. Once it's done, it can just be linked in every thread (and obviously there won't be hundreds of threads, just a few tens at most). The patch can be added as a pinned topic.

I find your argument misguided. Between threads, bumps, and unrelated bumps, there are at least 300 people who have failed to read the pinned topic before asking about ar0100.bif.

I meant that you make a pinned topic about the patch, and link to that topic in every new thread about the problem. Honestly, I don't think it's such a horrible burden for a mod author to reply with a link e.g. once per day (and it's probably an exaggeration that such reports are posted in every day by players). It especially shouldn't be considered a burden, because it's about fixing a bug, a problem. Should we suppress bugs because authors are lazy? (Again, I'm not referring to the -- really narrow -- group of mods which use COPY_EXISTING_REGEXP or GLOB or whatever, with quite wide masks) It should be up to the author to decide, yet most WeiDU-based mods (and sample codes) are full of "ELSE 0" statements, clearly suggesting that it's a generally good practice and should be used everywhere. Since new modders will check the code of existing mods, their mods will also contain the same code, which newer modders will use as a basis, and so on... The point is, many new modders who use sample code / existing code don't know what "ELSE 0" actually does, they just use it because they believe it to be some necessary thing or good practice.

About a year ago, I've seen some G3 WeiDU tutorials and mod codes, and they were full of "ELSE 0" statements, but without explanations. Since new modders consider such codes ("TP2 ninja" codes) as the most credible WeiDU TP2 sources, there should definitely be more documentation and explanation. It is similar to the problem that codes obviously use absolute offsets, but no one warns the new modders who use the code as a basis that those offsets can be different for their own files (inside variable-length sections).

To cut a long story short, modders (who are less familiar with this type of stuff, unlike you or me) shouldn't be kept in the misbelief that "ELSE 0" is something necessary; unfortunately, that's exactly what this "use existing code / use sample code" approach does. Tutorials should explicitly explain what the purpose of "ELSE x" is, and some modders should surely update their mods (I can imagine that there are many mods which use "ELSE 0" when they shouldn't). So each modder could decide on his/her own whether he/she wants to detect or suppress errors. Generally, the first case is much more beneficial.

About sample codes (as I'm sure most modders learn "ELSE 0" from such codes):

I tend to criticize certain modders/sites for influencing new modders and players too much (occassionally with unacceptable methods), convincing new modders and players that their methods are the best and superior, and others methods (such as Improved Anvil's solutions) are inferior. Actually, 'sample codes' are also a very effective way of influencing modders, and of course a totally acceptable way (most modders share their code also to help others, no doubt). However, sample codes have the disadvantage that they don't help the modder understand the interrelations and actual solutions, and on top of it all, they implicitly influence the modder's beliefs about what correct coding is. This is why tutorials are much better than such codes (but I understand that not all modders have time to write tutorials while sharing code is instant). Tutorials give general and widely usable information. So WeiDU code sharing is like an element of the child-parent relationship: the parent shows an example, the child (implicitly) learns it and starts to use it. For example, Gibberlings3 WeiDU coding standards and the associated "compatibility" definition was a typical example to this phenomenon: certain modders believed (or believe) that Improved Anvil isn't compatible with other mods because it's not designed as smartly as e.g. Gibberlings3 mods that are advertised as compatible with tons of other mods. (Needless to say that it's false; Improved Anvil's quality and robustness can be thanked to its great design and careful interoperability policy with other mods. There would be no way to make it more compatible with mods without giving up its quality or robustness.) They had/has this misbelief because they aren't skilled enough; they just implicitly learnt the coding standards and samples of many Gibberlings3 mods (and they didn't even notice how much they're influenced -- the child also doesn't know he/she is biased due to the example shown by the parents). If there were comprehensive tutorials and guides available, these modders would be provided with real information and knowledge, and thus they would get the chance to make unbiased decisions and judgements on their own. Actually, in this respect, sample codes (and the use of existing mod codes as a basis without understanding the deeper interrelations) can be considered as a -- sometimes probably unintentional -- way of making modders biased; if modders were forced to learn and understand the basics due to the lack of tutorials and sample codes, they would be able to make much more conscious judgements and decisions. This paragraph has become quite long, so let me close it with a message to all readers who are interested in modding with WeiDU: learn the interrelations, try to understand everything! Learn, if you want to make a good, above average mod! The statement "modding/coding is surprisingly easy" is a humbug; you will experience it on your own if you don't believe me

[The Bigg]

I meant that you make a pinned topic about the patch, and link to that topic in every new thread about the problem. Honestly, I don't think it's such a horrible burden for a mod author to reply with a link e.g. once per day (and it's probably an exaggeration that such reports are posted in every day by players). It especially shouldn't be considered a burden, because it's about fixing a bug, a problem.

In my case, ar0100.bif isn't a bug, and the only critical bug I'm aware of was never reported
While I don't get them one per day, I still get them with an high frequency (I might get ten in a day if I was mentioned on a particularly well read magazine).

<...>

I'm not really interested in bickering back and forth about how The IA Way is good vs. how The IA Way is bad, so I'll leave you to your sense of victory.

Beach: remove the file from the override directory, install Spellpack, and put it back there.