Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-ai: December 2002:
[freeciv-ai] Re: RFC: another fstk cleanup

[freeciv-ai] Re: RFC: another fstk cleanup

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: "Per I. Mathisen" <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: freeciv-ai@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [freeciv-ai] Re: RFC: another fstk cleanup
From: Gregory Berkolaiko <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 00:58:28 +0000

Attached is the part of you cleanup to which I have no objections.  Also, it
doesn't  introduce any behaviour changes in "hard" mode (ai_fuzzy has no effect
on "hard").  I suggest this be committed asap.

Other changes I am quite strongly opposed to, so they can/should be discussed

Quoting "Per I. Mathisen" <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>:

> It does:
>  - fix some comments, add some comments


>  - stop ships from whacking cities we can't occupy

They aren't.  The code you removed was encouraging land units to visit the city.

>  - don't assume enemy will build city walls

But they probably will!

>  - removed GB's /* FIXME: What if too far to walk? */ since this _is_
>    checked later in the code (see if (move_time > THRESHOLD))


>  - removed two duplicate ai_fuzzy()s


>  - replaced GB's erronous comment /* This is strange. Why don't we kill a
>    helpless enemy? -- GB */, as vuln==0 is used to denote that there is no
>    defender and we can't occupy the city.

The comment isn't erronous.  Besides, there is no city there, this has been
checked explicitly before.

>  - use two new macros: CAN_OCCUPY and IS_ATTACKER to make some hard to
>    read code a little more obvious


Also: partially restored the comment about yo-yoing warships


Attachment: fstk2.diff
Description: Text document

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