[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Keepig Xconq and Freeciv syncronized.

[Erik Sigra <sigra@xxxxxxx>]

fredagen den  2 februari 2001 19:02 skrev Tuomas Airaksinen:
> On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 11:12:58AM +0100, Erik Sigra wrote:
> > Even if they develop it further, Freeciv will continue to work. And we
> > will notice, because we are subscribed to xconq-cvs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > and xconq7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (at least I am). Then we will port it. I
> > just ported the whole thing, so it would certainly be possible to port a
> > few bug fixes as well. They will notice us too, because they are
> > subscribed to freeciv-dev (at least their chief, Stan).
>
> Hmm.. Yep. It's important that there are at least some who take care of
> this. But most people, or some like myself, don't have time to read many
> mailing lists. And if you read only subjects, it's quite probable that you
> miss important ones.

The relative difference in noise between the Freeciv lists and the Freeciv 
lists + the Xconq lists is neglible. In other words, if you are already 
subscribed to the Freeciv lists, you won't notice the small increase that the 
Xconq lists add. If you are worried about noise, skip the main list and have 
only the announce and/or cvs lists.

> > But porting could be easier. As it is now, each game independently
> > implements a bunch of helper functions; a logging function, a random
> > function and some string handling functions. They all have different
> > names and behave slightly different, which makes porting difficult.

Another example; both games have their own set of malloc wrappers!

> > We understand that both programs need these functions. I suspect that
> > most programs need (some of) them and implement them independently. What
> > a waste of effort. It is obviously a flaw in the platform (the C language
> > and libc) that all this waste of effort is necessary.
> 
> Hmm.. But is there much same between those games? I know next to nothing
> about xconq, I have tried, but first impression was so bad (it were buggy,
> crashed and looked strange) that I left it alone. Maybe it has developed
> since I tried it but is its purpose even near freeciv's purpose?

Yes, there is much same between those games; turn based strategy, 
multiplayer, world model, map generation, tiles with images, overhead & 
isometric view, terrain types (although Freecivs terrain types are 
hard-coded, while Xconq's are generalized and customizable), rivers, units, 
production, economy, research, advances, combat, history, AI, ...

Yes, it is buggy. Possibly even buggier than Freeciv. Some of the bugs are 
probably in Tcl/Tk, just like some of Freeciv's bugs are in GTK+. And yes, it 
has developed since you tried it. Right now, they are working on an SDL 
(http://www.libsdl.org) interface. The first pieces of it are already in cvs. 

The fashinating features of Xconq are hidden deep inside the back-end, and 
most people unfortunately never discover them, because the unappealing 
interface (and name) turns them of. That's what the new interface is going to 
change. And I tried to do my part of it and dig up the name generation. To 
get a feel of the complexity, read the 3 maunals at 
<http://sources.redhat.com/xconq/manual/xconq_1.html>, 
<http://sources.redhat.com/xconq/manual/xcdesign_1.html> and 
<http://sources.redhat.com/xconq/manual/hacking_1.html>.

No, it's purpouse is not to clone Civ1&2, CTP and SMAC, it is to be a general 
platform for turn based games, on the expense of the ability to emulate any 
particular game closely.

> It has strange interface, no city improvements many differences to
> civilization. Freeciv has succeeded to become a very good, compact game and
> it's developed very high on what it is.

Here is a screenshot of that strange interface (the old Tcl/Tk, not the new 
SDL): <http://hem.passagen.se/eriksig/Xconq-civ.png>. It shows the 
experimental Civ2 emulation game. In the list of things to build, I can 
indeed see all the city improvements.

> Why has freeciv its own random functions? Why doesn't it use standard
> functions?

Why is Freeciv so monolithic? That I asked too. I guess it is for the same 
reason as Xconq; that there are not good enough standard random functions on 
all the target platforms.