fixthissite

What are you trying to do? Right now, you aren't actually setting anything. Although you pass the method "false", you do not do anything with the value inside of the setRunning method. Do you have a "running" field variable that you want to adjust through the setRunning method?

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/111933/why-shouldnt-i-use-hungarian-notationCompilers handle semantic analysis. No need to mix type semantics it into your code. It could hurt during refactoring. If you're going to use hungarian notation, use it the right way (apps hungarian https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_notation#Systems_vs._Apps_Hungarian)

In detail, he has 2 different walking states: WALK_TO_SPOT and WALK_TO_BANK. He is using the same method for spot as he is for bank. It walks to spot, but it will not walk to bank, although WALK_TO_BANK is the current state and canProcess returns true.

Not for me, as I'm not interested in bidding on the account. It's for other potential bidders that may turn away after seeing your bid, although you no longer wanted to do it.

Sounds fun, might have to join in on that

You should have let him know so he could continue the biddings, and allow others to see that the highest bid was not what you posted.

Sorry to hear about your troubles. Such behavior should not be tolerable in a community (virtual goods market) where lying may result in accounts being hacked or money be stolen. Seeing how Square is already looking into other accounts, and has yet to mention anything of your account since his bid, he should either be forced to assess the situation or be given warning points. As for Tim, he has only 3 posts and has not had much activity since his bid. I wouldn't doubt he wasn't comitted to his bid.

Yes, the other Tasks having different constructors could have caused the problem. If one of those tasks had higher priority in the classpath than the Task you wanted (assuming they were both loaded in for some reason), you would get that error, since they do not contain the constructor you want (instead, they contain one for a different script)

That's really strange. I'm not sure how the client handles classloading for scripts, so this is a long shot, but:Is this a local script? Do you have other local scripts? Do those other local scripts use the same package hierachy as this one, and possibly contain a core.Task? Try temporarily removing any other local scripts you may have. This is just to make sure that in the case of the classloader loading types of other local scripts, none of those script's types conflict with the one you are testing. It would also be helpful to elaborate more on the situation. Do you happen to run any other scripts before running this one? Has this happened to you before (your title says again, so...), and if so what was the issue and was it with this same script? It's easier to help if you give as much detail as possible

You should show your workspace hierarchy. When this happens due to relocating, there's a good chance another Task binary file is interfering (one which does not have that constructor, but maybe a constructor which accepts a different script or maybe has no parameters). Since a ClassNotFoundException was not thrown, there is definitely a Task type, it just doesn't contain the constructor you need. Do you have any other Task files in the workspac/project that you moved the script to?

Good question. I shall begin the investigation immediately.

He could actually use copyInto, which is backed by System.arraycopy. But seeing how DefaultListModel is backed by Vector, it would be wiser to use your own ListModel implementation, allowing you to add this support while potentionally increasing performance.

I totally understand, terms can get pretty ambiguous while programming (such as instance and object) so it's important to correctly define them.I just feel the naming situation in this case is of low priority compared to subjects in the botting community, and attempting to change the term would do nothing more than force verbosity (scripter and scripting are less verbose than bot writer (developer would be a more proper term) and "writing a script"). If you want to get real technical, using Java is an option. "Bot developers" write code to interact with the client in some way. The client itself doesn't even need to be Java (albiet no one wants to recreate an RS client in a scripting language, although it has technically been done) let alone the scripts. We choose to use a compiled language for scripts. If we were to switch to a scripting language, would we revert back to the "scripting" term? Doesn't seem worth it.. Although the technical term may be "bot", and I totally agree that the root term should be bot (hell, lets bring "Intelligent Agent" back, sounds cooler), I think it's fair to accept "script" as an alias, for the sake of simplicity.

He makes a good point, but now we're going in circles. If he would accept "intelligent agent", but refuses it due to irrelevance in modern times, looks like we're back to bot (virtual artificial agent). Honestly, I feel there's more important things to focus on. This is just going to snowball into even stupider question such as "so do we stop calling developers scripters?". Finding out whether or not this classifies as "scripting" will not help in preventing detection or improve the capability of bots, which is a way more important subject. I agree that the AI definition for scripting does not qualify after his more extensive research, but I gotta admit, I hardly did any research at all. This really doesn't seem like a subject that'll get anyone anywhere. Arbiter, you sound like a smart guy, appreciate the information, but please put time into things that are more beneficial There's criteria in the botting community that can be taken to the next level, please put your brain power towards those areas (such as statistically guided anti-bans)

It depends on how you define "script". If you're referring to a script in the context of programming, then you are definitely not "scripting" while using Java, since it is not a scripting language. Java programs are not scripts, since they are compiled. However, in the context of artificial intelligence, they are most definitely scripts.

Thats because you ended your if statement with a ;, rather than opened it up with a { } to contain the trout eating code. You are doing if(...); Eat you should be doing if(...) { Eat }

>> is a bitshift operation, > is the greater than comparison. When you do # > #, it will return true or false (a boolean). if you do # >> #, it will return an int. If statements require booleans.

You should look into control flow statements (https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/nutsandbolts/flow.html)

Line breaking while method chaining is also an easier way to find the source of an exception when one is thrown

I never said Zeah was a wise choice. I honestly don't even play RS anymore. I was just informing him of why some people may be against it, since he didn't understand why people would want to prevent new features

It's killing the idea of OSRS. Within time, ideas like this will lead to another mob crying for the "old runescape" once again. As a business decision, it seems counter-intuitive. Rather than OSRS be a ressurection of a previous time in RuneScape, they are taking it as another attempt at the game. With updates like this, the idea that brought OSRS to existance is deteriorating. It may bring a new community of players (which is somewhat doubtful, seeing how Jagex doesn't market OSRS as games are commonly advertised). Long story short, some people don't like change, and it doesn't seem as if OSRS gets enough outside attention (outside of RS in general; not marketed independently) to bring in enough new faces to cover the ones that may leave. From a business perspective, OSRS has become a desperate attempt at resurecting the game by adding enough content to remove the idea of a "previous runescape" (it's more like a different version of RS now, especially with updates like this). I like new features, but not in a situation where it's counter-productive (killing off the motive that made OSRS what it is: people didn't like certain updates, so they had the option to go back to a previous version of rs)

On top of what Divinity said (and as I suggested in the PM), you should check out this thread, which contains custom interaction methods. As you know, I'm not a scripter, so I can't confirm the efficiency of the methods (or if they even work), but it seems like a pretty good place to start. Good luck

Move the Rules thread to Support, as support stands out as "Come here for information" better than news and announcements. Fix the homepage so we can access navigation from mobile devices. As of now, none of the navigation options appear (from my Galaxy Note 3, which has a pretty high res). Add a "Java Mentor" rank. Although there are scripter (OSD and SDN) ranks, some would rather not be bothered by (or maybe cannot answer some) general java problems. However, others who may not have as high as a scripter rank (or no rank at all, such as myself) may be experienced in Java and don't mind people coming to them for programming help. Some scripters could use the rank (if they apply) to help get their name out there, and new developers will know who to go to for help. I believe this will help encourage a stronger programming community, which will hopefully help result in a stronger scripting community. Allow the "full editor", which allows easy code wrapping and what not, to be used from mobile devices. I'm forced to "request desktop site" just to have access to them, albiet the UI is pretty much the same (just lacks the tools), and I'm sure others who use their phones may find it annoying when attempting to upload an image or create a hyperlink. Thanks for reading, hope I'm not the only one who feels these changes should be made

Feel free to send me a pm if you wanna learn some Java

....insanity plea?