Set negative draw priority for Building Markers

[ampersand38]

When merged this pull request will:

• Prevent Building Markers from covering player placed markers
• Add setMarkerDrawPriority event
• Call event after building marker creation
• 

[mharis001]

Need to handle removing the JIP event if the marker is deleted.

[johnb432]

Should building markers be removable for other reasons than building deletion?
Do building markers remain global or should local changes be permitted?

If not, I imagine it's possible to replace the removed marker by detecting when a marker has been deleted with this EH:

• You could add this EH on all clients and they would raise an event on the server which would handle the deletion or replacement of the marker, depending if the marker was deleted because the building was deleted or for another reason.
• You could add this EH on the server only and have it deal with the marker deletion or replacement. This assumes that all building marker deletions would be global though.

If building markers should be removable, I guess the EH linked above still can be used, but it would be a bit more tricky: What if deleteMarkerLocal is used on building markers? Should the marker be replaced, so that you force people to use deleteMarker instead, or should the marker be editable on each client individually, as in permit different marker settings (existence, visibility, size, direction, etc)?

[ampersand38]

nice one 3ea5c51
I don't think any mod can be so protective of its stuff.
What use case is there for building markers showing differently between clients?

[johnb432]

nice one 3ea5c51 I don't think any mod can be so protective of its stuff. What use case is there for building markers showing differently between clients?

I agree that a mod shouldn't be that overprotective. As for the use case of building markers showing differently on clients, I don't really know, I'm not a mission maker. I was mostly thinking of how badly the marker system could/would break if you started messing with markers on a per client basis.

[rautamiekka]

Interestingly, CBA_fnc_removeGlobalEventJIP can be told to wait for the object (in this case the marker) to be deleted before actually proceeding with deleting the JIP order, so this should work, adding some inherent sleep by spawn:

Suggested change

	[QEGVAR(common,setMarkerDrawPriority), [_marker, -1], _marker] call CBA_fnc_globalEventJIP;
	private _jipID = [QEGVAR(common,setMarkerDrawPriority), [_marker, -1], _marker] call CBA_fnc_globalEventJIP;
	[_jipID, _marker] spawn CBA_fnc_removeGlobalEventJIP;

[ampersand38]

Very cool indeed. It would probably need to be _object not _marker I think, looking at the params?

[rautamiekka]

Maybe, I dunno; just interpreted this line.

[ampersand38]

2297b56

[mharis001]

Does not handle the marker being removed without the object being deleted.

[johnb432]

I really wouldn't use the marker value in a "raw" format. I'm certain there are mods out there that already do that.

I would use something like this:

Suggested change

	missionNamespace setVariable [_marker, _object];
	missionNamespace setVariable [format [QGVAR(object_), _marker], _object];

I haven't checked if it works, but it would be safer to use imo.

[ampersand38]

I should have just used netID.
_marker is already format [QGVAR(%1), _object call BIS_fnc_netId] "zen_building_markers_0:1".
incidentally,
allMapMarkers apply {isNil {missionnamespace getVariable _x}} // [true,true]

[rautamiekka]

+1 level of indentation.