[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [PATCH] Corecleanup_07Part2 has been put in incoming

[Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Sep 02, 2001 at 07:58:15PM +0200, Gaute B Strokkenes wrote:
> On Sun, 02 Sep 2001, gs234@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> >>> +#define MAPSTEP(x,y,x1,y1,dir)     \
> >>> +  do {                              \
> >>> +    (x) = (x1) + DIR_DX[(dir)];     \
> >>> +    (y) = (y1) + DIR_DY[(dir)];     \
> >>> + /* if ((x) == -1)              */  \
> >>> + /*   (x) = map.xsize-1;       */  \
> >>> + /* else if ((x) == map.xsize) */  \
> >>> + /*   (x) = 0;                  */  \
> >>> +    (x) = map_adjust_x((x));       \
> >>> +  } while (0)                     
> >> 
> >> IMHO MAPSTEP should be a method which does:
> >> int mapstep(int old_x,int old_y,int *new_x,int *new_y,int dir)
> >> {
> >>    *new_x = old_x + DIR_DX[dir];
> >>    *new_y = old_y + DIR_DY[dir];
> >>    return normalize_map_pos(new_x,new_y);
> >> }
> >> 
> >> With such a method we get everything which has to do with position
> >> creating and checking in one method and place.
> > 
> > I don't see much gain in doing so.  
> 
> Allow me to elaborate.  The above would be perfectly fine if we
> inlined both mapstep() and normalize_map_pos().  As long as we don't,
> the perfomance loss associated with tacking two function calls on to
> half of the leaf functions in Freeciv is IMNSHO not justifiable on the
> gounds that you can reduce the number of places with topological
> knowledge in map.[ch] from ten to five.

In the long term I think we should/will have inline methods. I see no
reason to not make the critical methods inline.

        Raimr

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 "It is not yet possible to change operating system by writing
  to /proc/sys/kernel/ostype."              sysctl(2) man page