Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: November 2002:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Agents and network (Was (for reasons unnown): Path fin
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Agents and network (Was (for reasons unnown): Path fin

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: Raimar Falke <rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Freeciv Development List <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Agents and network (Was (for reasons unnown): Path findig)
From: Gregory Berkolaiko <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 19:20:46 +0000 (GMT)

On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Raimar Falke wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 01:17:23PM +0000, Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Jason Dorje Short wrote:
> > 
> > Possible solutions are:
> 
> > 1. Make client fully rules-aware (duplicate rules engine in client)
> 
> The client already knows how a city is recalculated. Note that this
> doesn't help since only the server state is important. So at some
> point the client has to "update" the server state.

Which means you already moved a chunk of the server into the client and 
compatibility issues wil arise whenever somebody decides to change the 
rules (of, say, specialists / happiness relationship).

> > 2. Move the agents to the server.
> 
> Depends on what you mean by this. The obvious interpretation would be
> to move cma_core.c into server/ and also adapt the protocol. This is
> bad and I won't do it.

Depends what cma_core contains, but I guess this is what I mean.  Why is 
this bad?

> Another interpretation would be that the client can "somehow" send an
> agent to the server and this agent then is executed "near" the
> server. Another process of the same host for example. You can a lot of
> other problems with this however.

Mmh...  Hardly realisable.

G.




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