Previous patches that removed shifts of constant negative values
to eliminate UB were valid, but did not correct all places where
this engine was potentially bit shifting negative values. There is
no reason to not just use multiplication and division and let the
compiler make the right choice for optimisation for an
architecture, so that is what this patch does.
This flag is removed for a few reasons:
* Engines universally set this flag to true for widths > 320,
which made it redundant everywhere;
* This flag functioned primarily as a "force 1x scaler" flag,
since its behaviour was almost completely undocumented and users
would need to figure out that they'd need an explicit non-default
scaler set to get a scaler to operate at widths > 320;
* (Most importantly) engines should not be in the business of
deciding how the backend may choose to render its virtual screen.
The choice of rendering behaviour belongs to the user, and the
backend, in that order.
A nearby future commit restores the default1x scaler behaviour in
the SDL backend code for the moment, but in the future it is my
hope that there will be a better configuration UI to allow users
to specify how they want scaling to work for high resolutions.
Added it into hasFeature() of all engines which returned `true` in
simpleSaveNames() before.
As mentioned in #788, SCI is not always using simple names, so it
doesn't have such feature now.
Engines with "simple" savenames would support "Run in background" in
save/load dialog and gradual save slots unlocking. Other engines
save/load feature would be locked until save sync is over.
The bug was caused by a check introduced by me to avoid division-by-zero errors
when the source and dest x values are equal.
This had the side effect that it didn't work well in this case outlined in the
bug report, maybe also in other places.
I'm not sure how to handle a DBZ correctly here so I'm setting the x delta to
1.0 if it would normally be 0.0, which seems to work after walking around
in some scenes.
This might not be obvious to a C++ developer, but we use C's sin which is
*always* double. Thus, sin will return a double and therefore some compilers
might warn about this conversion.
