Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: October 2001:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [PATCH] flags_in_front (PR#1014)
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [PATCH] flags_in_front (PR#1014)

[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] flags_in_front (PR#1014)
From: Daniel Sjölie <deepone@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 22:04:18 +0200

On 2001-10-19 17:20:11, Raimar Falke wrote:
> > > Why don't you bundle chiefs_front.spec and shields_front.spec with the
> > > new tileset (for example civ2gfx)? Why has these two files be included
> > > in the normal CVS tree?
> > 
> > There is no new tileset...
> > The civ2gfx is generated by a script posted to this list from civ2
> > graphics file... But even so the files we're talking about doesn't
> > belong to any tileset really... That's why they're in the misc dir...
> > And that's why the new ones should be in the normal CVS tree... They can
> > be used in any tileset (with the same dimensions?) to position the gfx
> > representing shields, health and such that doesn't really belong to a
> > specific tileset in a way suited for when having shields and such in
> > front...
> > 
> > So, if you're doing tests with flags_in_front set to 1 then you should
> > also replace chiefs.spec with chiefs_front.spec (and same with shields)
> > to get the result I'm after... This should not be done automatically when
> > flags_in_front is set to 1 - that's wouldn't be flexible...
> 
> This should be documented somewhere.

If I include some tilespecs that use this as intended and put a comment
or two there that should do it, right?

> Is it possible to make and include a
> {engels,trident}_shields_front.tilespec? This would make this
> connection between the flat and the modified chiefs_front.spec and
> shields_front.spec explicit.

Mmm... 
But as I think about this I realize it's really quite ugly...
What I'm doing with the *_front.spec files is shanging where the gfx
will be drawn... That is, I only change x_top_left and y_top_left...
When you consider making this for several tilesets of different
dimensions you realize that you would need new spec files for each
"dimension set" whit only two values changed... That's really ugly...

So, how can we do this better? Can it be done in another way as it is?
Ideally I would set an offset for a spec file in the tilespec file...
Is this possible? Any other way to do this right?
I'll take a look at the (tile)spec code and see what I can do...

My initial thought is to make it possible to write something like:
files = 
  .....
  "misc/chiefs.spec@32,25",
  "misc/shields.spec@32,25"

to set offset of everything loaded from a spec file in the tilespec
file... That would solve the problem in a much nicer way... IMHO...

What do you think?

/Daniel
  -- 
Now take a deep breath, smile and don't take life so seriously... :)


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