[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Reproducable core dump (PR#1051)
[Top] [All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 09:46:45AM -0800, jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
> > --- jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >>Gregory Berkolaiko wrote
> >>> --- jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >>>>Gregory Berkolaiko wrot
> >>My current implementation isn't completely minimalist: it will refuse
> >>to fly through unknown tiles but will happily fly through known, fogged
> >>tiles assuming no enemy is there. Is this wise? Really, a fogged tile
> >>is just as likely to contain an enemy as an unknown tile.
> > Exactly.
> > But Raimar is right, it would be good to make it a constant, something
> > AIR_ASSUMES_UNKNOWN_SAFE
> > and
> > AIR_ASSUMES_FOGGED_SAFE
> I'm not too happy with adding constants up in a header file that will
> only be used in this one function. If it's the preferred way to do
> things, though, I'll do it. Where would the enumeration be placed?
Smallest possible scope. This may the same c-file. This still adds
> > We should also introduce a check for ai.control: if the plane is
> > controlled by AI (which doesn't happen now but will be surely added at
> > some point), it wouldn't care if the tile is not seen -- AI cheats and
> > peeks under fog.
> > But for that we should also introduce a constant
> > AI_SEES_ALL
> > and later it should probably become a variable in struct player.
> This I disagree with. True, the current AI cheats by looking under the
> fog of war, but isn't that something to fix rather than promote?
> If you must go this route, one idea would be to add a new server
> variable, aicheats, that is user-settable. Enabling it would up the
> difficulty. But I don't think any of the AI's (no matter how difficult)
> should cheat by default.
"Life is too short for reboots."
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Reproducable core dump (PR#1051), jdorje, 2001/11/30