Feature request - multiple fast forward profiles

If you're having problems with Snes9x, or think you've found a bug, this is the place to be.
Post Reply
odditude
Snes9x Green Belt
Posts: 454
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 2:35 pm

Feature request - multiple fast forward profiles

Post by odditude »

I have a feature request - multiple fast forward profiles, each with their own settable frameskip, hotkey, and hold/toggle settings.

Usage scenario:
ffwd1 is set to frameskip 1, hotkey on keyboard, toggle. used to play games at double normal speed.

ffwd2 is set to frameskip 9, hotkey on gamepad, hold. used to skip walls of text, slow animations, mind-numbing battle sequences, etc.

For simplicity's sake, higher-indexed ffwd profiles should override lower-indexed ones. In my usage scenario, that would mean that even if ffwd1 is toggled on, holding ffwd2 will override that until ffwd2 is released.

Thanks for the excellent 1.53 release!
SparroHawc
Official Android Porter
Posts: 303
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 9:20 pm
Location: All up in your business

Post by SparroHawc »

This is a -great- idea. It is, however, one best suited to a branch (or patch). How easy is it to tweak the GUI, O wonderful devs?
odditude
Snes9x Green Belt
Posts: 454
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 2:35 pm

Post by odditude »

Apologies for the bump.

SparroHawc, why do you think this is best suited for a branch/patch? If the feature is exposed via an "Advanced" dialog/panel or the config file, it would be accessible to all (and in future versions, I might add) without being in a place that is likely to confuse newbies.
SparroHawc
Official Android Porter
Posts: 303
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 9:20 pm
Location: All up in your business

Post by SparroHawc »

The reason is that it isn't a necessary function of the emulator. It's a good idea, yes, but there's other places I'd prefer they direct their attention. Now, if the UI can be easily tweaked to include it, someone else (like me, for example; I've been wanting to wade into SNES9x code for a while, I just need an excuse) could put together a patch, submit it to the devs, and if they deem it useful enough, they could fold it into the main branch - and in the meantime, offer the patched executable to anyone who wants the extended functionality.

I'm not saying it doesn't belong in the main binary eventually; I'm simply saying that it's something that would be easier to initially implement outside of the main branch.
Post Reply