Alright cool! I'm fine with using 2 different formats, but I would like them to have the same names, at least. Still, if your works with future releases and MCP doesn't, I would prefer your system above MCP, if it had everything I needed.
For reference, here's what I'm using: http://pastebin.com/n9bz3awv
Its weakness is that can't distinguish between methods of the same name. For example there are 2 methods called "load" in methods.csv, one with comments for MCP and one that doesn't. I use that to call a specific method. Sometimes, though, there are multiple methods with the same name with no comment, like readFromNBT. In those cases, I may need to call them manually like with the 3 within the link above.
The problem is that MCP is made to translate from obfuscated to deobfuscated, and what I'm doing is the other way around. So if your format doesn't have that problem, it will be superior for my cause.
For reference, here's what I'm using: http://pastebin.com/n9bz3awv
Its weakness is that can't distinguish between methods of the same name. For example there are 2 methods called "load" in methods.csv, one with comments for MCP and one that doesn't. I use that to call a specific method. Sometimes, though, there are multiple methods with the same name with no comment, like readFromNBT. In those cases, I may need to call them manually like with the 3 within the link above.
The problem is that MCP is made to translate from obfuscated to deobfuscated, and what I'm doing is the other way around. So if your format doesn't have that problem, it will be superior for my cause.