Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: October 2001:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Patch] Make do_unit_goto return a meaningful value (P
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Patch] Make do_unit_goto return a meaningful value (P

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx, bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Patch] Make do_unit_goto return a meaningful value (PR#985)
From: Gregory Berkolaiko <gberkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2001 17:44:11 +0100 (BST)

 --- Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
> On Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 12:13:32AM +0100, Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
>
> > Actually I would be surprised if this case is ever encountered but
> it's
> > interpretation is as follows: human-owned unit was on eXplore,
> > encountered something and attacked it.  Wants to rest now.  How about
> >   return GR_OUT_OF_MOVEPOINTS
> > with a comment?  Alternatively, can return something like
> > GR_GOT_IN_TROUBLE and let the superior code decide whether to cancel
> > eXplore.
> 
> What about a class where all such cases go in: GR_REST or
> GR_SPECIAL_CASE or GR_WEIRD?

I actually like your GR_REST but not in the sense you mean, more like
GR_NEED_REST.  

Anyway, I think the return value should be determined by the needs of the
caller functions.  So I will look again at all the cases in which
do_unit_goto is called, see what information they would find useful,
think hard and change my patch accordingly.

Best,
G.


____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie


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