Talk:PlaceAtMe

Distance and Direction

I was recently asked if PlaceAtMe's optional parameters determining distance and direction have any effect, and when I tested it out via the console they didn't seem to have any effect on the placement of the new reference. Can anyone confirm that these parameters are just vestigial from Oblivion?
-- Cipscis 01:29, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

In my experience when using PlaceAtMe in scripts, those parameters have never had any effect either. I'm aware you've already added this to the Notes - would it make sense to update the Example so people don't get the impression they do have an effect? I'd also wonder if we'd want to do anything to the Syntax definition, either omitting those parameters, or somehow noting right there that they have no effect. If there's other cases of this kind of thing, maybe it'd make sense to add a "Deprecated" flag to Template:FunctionArgument.

Related to this, I'm removing the following note (from the first revision of the CS Wiki's PlaceAtMe page):

• If the placement location is not safe (in the air, in a wall, etc), the object will be placed at one of the other axes or at the object's exact location.

...since it makes no sense, and what I think it's trying to say is untrue (at least in FO3). That is, the specified object is always placed at the exact coordinates of the calling reference, wherever that may be. Of course if both objects have collision and at least one is subject to havok physics, it will be pushed out, but this has nothing to do with PlaceAtMe.

--Hugepinball 18:13, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Oops! I didn't realise when I added the note about those parameters that the example used them. I've fixed the example now.

I'd prefer it if the parameters were specified as deprecated, rather than removed completely, given that they're still recognised by the GECK's compiler. I've added a comment on the Template_talk:FunctionArgument page about this so we can discuss there how it should be represented.
-- Cipscis 01:31, 4 March 2010 (UTC)