This updates the maker data to (mostly) mirror that of the Wiki:
https://wiki.dolphin-emu.org/index.php?title=GameIDs
Only maker ids from that page are now included in Dolphin. This
means no homebrew/unofficial makers.
Also, separate multiple maker names with a slash
Change the repair logic to fix issues more aggressively by deleting bad
titles. This is necessary because of a bug in Dolphin's WAD boot code.
The UI code was updated to inform the user about titles that will be
deleted if they continue a repair, before deleting anything.
Old versions of Dolphin are so broken regarding NAND handling that
we need this to repair common issues and avoid issues with titles
like the System Menu or the Wii Shop.
This isn't an exhaustive check, but this will catch most issues
and offer to fix them automatically (if possible).
Some of my WiiWare games does not have a maker :
- Blue's Journey : EAFPJ8
- Magician Lord : EACPJ8
- The King of Fighters '94 : EAGPJ8
- The Last Ninja : C9XPGX
- World Games : C9ZPGX
Makes the toolbar look more comfortable instead of all squished
together, and more similar to our current look.
Instead of setting a hardcoded minimal size for buttons, MakeActions()
now uses the maximum size hint width.
* remove useless units after 'zero' values
* reduce the size of 'Dolphin' to be more reasonable and look better
* avoid hardcoding the normal and small font sizes
Just create the AboutDialog on the stack -- the actual object lives on
the heap anyway, since Qt uses the pimpl idiom. Removes the need for
an explicit new and a special delete on close attribute.
EmulationStateChanged is functionally correct right now, but
ConfigChanged expresses more semantically why the config setting gets
re-read and the widgets updated.
Ideally Common.h wouldn't be a header in the Common library, and instead be renamed to something else, like PlatformCompatibility.h or something, but even then, there's still some things in the header that don't really fall under that label
This moves the version strings out to their own version header that doesn't dump a bunch of other unrelated things into scope, like what Common.h was doing.
This also places them into the Common namespace, as opposed to letting them sit in the global namespace.
The class NonCopyable is, like the name says, supposed to disallow
copying. But should it allow moving?
For a long time, NonCopyable used to not allow moving. (It declared
a deleted copy constructor and assigment operator without declaring
a move constructor and assignment operator, making the compiler
implicitly delete the move constructor and assignment operator.)
That's fine if the classes that inherit from NonCopyable don't need
to be movable or if writing the move constructor and assignment
operator by hand is fine, but that's not the case for all classes,
as I discovered when I was working on the DirectoryBlob PR.
Because of that, I decided to make NonCopyable movable in c7602cc,
allowing me to use NonCopyable in DirectoryBlob.h. That was however
an unfortunate decision, because some of the classes that inherit
from NonCopyable have incorrect behavior when moved by default-
generated move constructors and assignment operators, and do not
explicitly delete the move constructors and assignment operators,
relying on NonCopyable being non-movable.
So what can we do about this? There are four solutions that I can
think of:
1. Make NonCopyable non-movable and tell DirectoryBlob to suck it.
2. Keep allowing moving NonCopyable, and expect that classes that
don't support moving will delete the move constructor and
assignment operator manually. Not only is this inconsistent
(having classes disallow copying one way and disallow moving
another way), but deleting the move constructor and assignment
operator manually is too easy to forget compared to how tricky
the resulting problems are.
3. Have one "MovableNonCopyable" and one "NonMovableNonCopyable".
It works, but it feels rather silly...
4. Don't have a NonCopyable class at all. Considering that deleting
the copy constructor and assignment operator only takes two lines
of code, I don't see much of a reason to keep NonCopyable. I
suppose that there was more of a point in having NonCopyable back
in the pre-C++11 days, when it wasn't possible to use "= delete".
I decided to go with the fourth one (like the commit title says).
The implementation of the commit is fairly straight-forward, though
I would like to point out that I skipped adding "= delete" lines
for classes whose only reason for being uncopyable is that they
contain uncopyable classes like File::IOFile and std::unique_ptr,
because the compiler makes such classes uncopyable automatically.
Léo Lam