Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: February 2002:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Patch] Add BOOL_VAL around ANDs
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Patch] Add BOOL_VAL around ANDs

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: freeciv development list <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Patch] Add BOOL_VAL around ANDs
From: Gregory Berkolaiko <gberkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 17:50:27 +0000 (GMT)

 --- Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 01:26:25PM +0000, Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
> >  --- Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
> > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 01:37:10PM +0100, Petr Baudis wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > Hmm, I would like tile_has_special() much more that BOOL_VAL(..).
> It
> > > fixes the
> > > > boolean issue _and_ raises the level of encapsulation, which is
> good.
> > > 
> > > I have no problem introducing contains_special. Petr, Gregory?

> See the attached patch. What about the name? I also tought about
> ss_contains_special/set_contains_special for
> special_set_contains_special.

special_set isn't good in any combination: the first time I read I
thought "set" is used as a verb and was confused.  but ss is better if
explained somewhere as "set of specials".  maybe ss_has_special?
it's the shortest too...
but don't worry about it too much, I think contains_special is cool too.

I also think that making 3 functions

ss_has_special(ss, special)
tile_has_special(tile, special) 
{
  return has_special(tile->special, special)
}
map_has_special(x, y, special)
{
  return has_special(MAP_TILE(x,y), special)
}

is good. but maybe just a bit too extravagant...

> I'm looking for people's opinions. For direction of the patches in
> general and errors. 
> 
> Will 24 hours be enough?

it should vary basing on the amount of structural changes the patch
introduces.  but I think 24 hours should be a minimum, especially taking
into account time differences.

as for maintainers not commiting own patches, I think it is a very good
and democratic idea.  it would also remind maintainers what it is like to
be waiting for the patch to be reviewed while reviewers are playing with
some new toy like Splint ;)  i am all for trying it.

but as a minimum, I think mainteiners should at least submit patches for
review and wait 24 hours.  it's only polite to do so.  although they
contributed much more to freeciv, it is still our common project, after
all.

Best wishes,
G.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com


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