[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Server Overhaul (was Re: Re: Split patch)

[Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 12:53:29PM -0400, Justin Moore wrote:
> 
> > It looks like a huge amount of the changes you made are code moving.
> 
>    Uh, *all* of the changes are code moving, except for adding the new
> files to server/Makefile.am and a minor alteration of a data structure.
> That's the whole point of these patches.

Aha.

> > I think that such code movements provides no real benefit.
> 
>    Of course this is a subjective, biased comment

Yes it is.

> , but personally I think the code movements provide great benefit.
> It
> 
> - provides a much cleaner API
> - modularizes the code into manageable chunks, and
> - greatly improves code readability
> 
>    I get the impression that we never really "threw one away" a la Fred
> Brooks, and the code shows it (quite painfully in some sections).
> 
> > For example it may turn out that the partition into settings and
> > commands is useless/wrong because the unification needs another
> > partition of the code.
> 
>    As in unification will require us to make another partition, or it will
> require information from two partitions?  For the former, we just make the
> partition, no big deal.  For the latter, I think that requirement would
> show that we're going about the unification the wrong way.

The first. But it can turn out that the current code is partitioned
two times.

> > I'm not sure what you have "really" changed. Can you make a
> > patch which just contains these changes?
> 
>    The changes *are* the code movement and modularization.  The full
> series of patches would include the split function, along with tons and
> tons of cleanups to the actual parsing code.  It would easily double the
> size.  The patches in incoming are *only* the code rearrangement; once
> it's been rearranged, *then* I'll worry about cosmetic cleanups.
> 
> > I may change my opinion about the mode moving if you find interceders
> > (people which agree that this is good) for this idea.
> 
>    Well *I* think it's a good idea. :)
> 
>    Seriously, though, the cleaner the code, the more easily we'll get new
> people willing to hack on it.  Again, there are parts that are a *BIG*
> mess (*cough*theAI*cough*) but only a few that I'm willing to touch. :)

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 "When C++ is your hammer, everything looks like a thumb."
    -- Steven M. Haflich