[Freeciv-Dev] Re: patch: remove remaining hardwired tech effects (PR#118)

[sebauer@xxxxxxxxxxx (Sebastian Bauer)]

Hello David

> This patch adds some more data about techs to ruleset files, so
> that the tech_type_id enum values are not used anywhere in the code.
> This is better for modpacks (otherwise have to make sure eg Bridge
> Buildings is in just the right position in tech list etc), and allows 
> for soon making the number of techs variable (like unit types).

Great :-)
I have send a patch a short time ago, which does this too ;-)
But it's little bit more general, because I use flags. And
it should also be variable and extendable (but not tested yet)

> Added game.rtech entries for:
> +    int temple_plus;           /* eg Mysticism */
> +    int construct_bridges;     /* eg Bridge Building */
> +    int construct_fortress;    /* eg Construction */
> +    int construct_rail;        /* eg Railroad */
> (temple_plus in buildings.ruleset, others in techs.ruleset)

I have this done as flags. This would allow differnt tech
trees for e.g. modpack writers. I also removed the boat_fast
and implemented as a flag. So a modpack writer can e.g.
increase the move rate of sea units another time.
Actually the temple flag is also in the tech.ruleset but
I stated somewhere that it should be moved into the building
ruleset somewhen ;-)

> And tech lists for:
> + int pop_pollution[MAX_NUM_TECH_LIST]; /* pop = population */ + int
> partisan_req[MAX_NUM_TECH_LIST]; /* all required for uprisings */ + int
> trade_route_reduce[MAX_NUM_TECH_LIST]; /* reduce to 2/3 cumulative */

> (These lists could perhaps be better implemented as tech flags, 
> but this is probably good enough...)

In my patch Population Pollution has already implemented as a flag.
But trade route reducing not, but I written somewhere that this
would be better, too ;-)
(I see that we have the same goals ;-) )

The only thing what is not implemented is the requierement
for partisans (that's the reason why it is an alpha patch).
But I think like the templeflag should be moved to building.ruleset,
this should be moved to the unit ruleset.

> There is also some slightly questionable stuff about AI tech
> wants/hints for governemnts, re aicity.c: ai_manage_cities().
> Questionable because its somewhat complicated and should
> probably be folded into more general government evaluation
> routines.  But I put in replacement stuff because I wasn't
> sure how important it is, and the general goverment eval 
> stuff still needs to be updated and integrated.

Hmm...no idea about this. I let this in, that's why my patch
sill needs the A_ government techs. But if we combine our both
patches this will be gone, too.
I think we should work on my patch, because I already implemented
the flag mechanism.

bye,
Sebastian Bauer