Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: August 2001:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Patch] Introduction of turns
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Patch] Introduction of turns

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: "Ross W. Wetmore" <rwetmore@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, freeciv development list <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Patch] Introduction of turns
From: Trent Piepho <xyzzy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:43:51 -0700 (PDT)

On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Ross W. Wetmore wrote:
> >> Unless the computation is incredibly arcane, or there are update issues
> >
> >That's pretty much it.  In order to compute the turn from the year,
> >you need to know if and WHEN certain advances took place.  If I say
> >it's year 1950, you can't tell me the absolute turn number with that
> >information.  
> 
> Yes if the conversion depends on various parameters, the client needs those
> to run the algorithm.

But sending that information to the client would be more trouble than just
sending the turn number.  And then the server could always decide to use a
different method of stepping the year and throw off the client.

> >It's not like the client needs to query the server for the turn number.  You
> >just stick that data in a packet that contains the year and only gets sent
> >once per turn.
> 
> Updating existing packets to send dual info is fine, especially if this
> is/coincides with the current year update. I got the impression from Raimar's 
> wording he was using two (extra) new packets. 

I didn't see his patch, but I hope he didn't create two new packets.  It's
certainly not necessary.



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