Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: November 2001:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Reproducable core dump (PR#1051)

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Reproducable core dump (PR#1051)

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
Cc: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Reproducable core dump (PR#1051)
From: vze2zq63@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 17:43:26 -0500
Reply-to: jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxx

Mike Kaufman wrote:

On Fri, Nov 30, 2001 at 12:21:45PM -0800, jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

<snip: airspace_looks_usable()>

I realize that it could be nasty to implement, but at least for fogged
tiles, tiles that I just saw a turn or two ago feel safer to make a
beeline through (less chance that an enemy moved there in that time)
Also fogged tiles out in the middle of the ocean are safer than over
land; desert, arctic, mountains, and  tundra, tiles might be safer to 
transverse than grassland or plains would.

For unknown tiles, it's obviously harder to predict, but if I feel that
a blotch of unknown is over ocean, I don't worry too much about it, but
if I've traced out a coastline (with possibly an enemy city or two in sight), I automatically assume that the unknown interior is crawling with
enemies, so flying an airplane blindy wouldn't be such a good idea.

It's an interesting idea, but not worth the effort IMO until/unless airspace_looks_usable is used to actually find the path for the airplane, rather than just calculate whether one exists. This should be a separate project.

On a separate note, I just noticed that airspace_looks_usable is neither declared static nor is it properly prototyped at the top of the file. I'll fix this as well.


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