I know but just for game security concerns, and by the way everyone make mistakes. she may make one without noticing.
he*, and it is a really slim chance.
so what ask most other leading developers they wouldnt require a module that is outside the gameās environment, unless they made it or someone in their studio made it, its just called the best practice.
Iāve heard that requiring a module by id might have chance of causing a slight delay, but Iām not sure.
anyways, @sebi210 can you add this to the line above the error line
print(Codes)
print(input)
print(Codes[input])
print(Codes[input].Used)
this is called print debugging, a very useful tool
if something doesnāt make sense, print a bunch of it out.
if any of the above appear in the console as ānilā or " " then thatās likely your culprit
Heās told me that itās telling him that :Get() is a nil value.
Weāve tried :GetTable() too, but thatās apprently nil too.
maybe try this?
local CodesStore = dataStore2(CodeStoreName, player)
local Code = CodesStore:Get(setupUserData())
If nothing has been store yet it will be nil she needs to make a base table and if the datastore is nil then use the base table
yeah setupUserData() returns a table
Developers do in fact retrieve assets that are outside of the gameās environment. Not explicitly private modules but LinkedSources and now packages. Avoiding closed source modules isnāt necessarily bad practice but itās more preferable if you have your stuff available in your game. Packages make the best use of keeping things in-house while also allowing updates cross-place, cross-game.
@ReturnBreakEnd @sebi210
Romeo isnāt all that wrong. Requiring the module by itās asset id is only if you want to receive any updates made to DataStore2 as it supposedly updates frequently.
Kampf being a top developer doesnāt mean heās not prone to making mistakes, even on a production build. Therefore, if a mistake is pushed to the production build, that could affect your game. Having an unchanged copy in your game means that if the production build is bugged, your branch will remain unharmed.
Donāt rule out the possibility just because of who published it. Itās still a viable concern and should not be brushed aside by āslim chance Kampf will make a mistakeā.