Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: March 2004:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#8239) Speclist generator
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#8239) Speclist generator

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: per@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#8239) Speclist generator
From: "rwetmore@xxxxxxxxxxxx" <rwetmore@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 22:52:15 -0800
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxx

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=8239 >


Raimar Falke wrote:
> <URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=8239 >
> 
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 02:20:21AM -0800, Per I. Mathisen wrote:
> 
[...]
>>The C-compiler doesn't understand that a function, such as genlist_get(),
>>should return or take a type depending on the list type.
[...]
>>So the authors of the current speclists made a clever hack using cpp
>>that generates separate .c code for each list (our first code
>>generator).
[...]
> Yes the cpp is used as a generator. It is the good natural choice
> since it is portable, available and requires no extra time. You
> yourself wanted to implement the packet generator with cpp.
> 
>>However, this clever hack does not work with macro or inline
>>functions.
[...]
>>So in a way we do have an abstraction problem that the C compiler
>>doesn't understand.
> 
> 
> The C compiler doesn't understand it in the form we model it.
[...]
>       Raimar

I agree with Raimar on a lot of the push for extensions and techniques
beyond some of the current good ones, or beyond their legitimate bounds
and needs as far as gameplay.

First, get the model right and think about more than one option to do it.

If it cannot, then don't rewrite "C" to handle a problem that it was
clearly not designed for and not important to gameplay, but rather
rewrite Freeciv in a language that matches the new evolving set of
requirements.

Cheers,
RossW
=====




[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]