[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Tech cost patch v16 (PR#1082)

[Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 05:58:27PM +0100, Reinier Post wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 06:11:28PM +0200, Juha Litola wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 04:17:34PM +0100, Raimar Falke wrote:
> > > On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 01:40:42PM +0200, Juha Litola wrote:
> > 
> > > > +  if(has_capability("turn", aconnection.capability)) {
> > > This "turn" looks odd.
> > Yes, it should be tech_cost_style. Fixed.
> > 
> > > > +  req[tech]++;
> > > Is this equvialant to "req[tech]=1"?
> > Yes. Changed.
> > 
> > > find_unknown_req_techs and num_req_techs_rec perform the same
> > > task. Can you unify them to:
> > I'm not sure that this is too elegant, but I merged them
> > to find_requirements-function.
> > 
> > > It is more robust to do
> > > case 0:
> > > ...
> > > case 1:
> > > case 2:
> > >   return goal_tech_cost_rec(pplayer, goal);
> > > default:
> > >   assert(0);
> > >   exit(1);
> > Changed.
> > 
> > Also changed goal_tech_cost to tech_cost_for_reaching_goal and
> > num_unknown_req_techs to num_requirements.
> > 
> > -- 
> > // Juha Litola
> 
> These are all improvements, but still I'd like to ask you to move
> the AI code that needs find_requirements() to your own code.

Do you mean the first for loop of ai_select_tech? Or do you mean that
a is_tech_a_req_for_another_tech() would be nice?

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 "If at first you don't succeed... well so much for skydiving."