[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#2574) RFC: (PR# 1762) corruption revisited

["Davide Pagnin via RT" <rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2002-12-16 at 03:48, rwetmore@xxxxxxxxxxxx via RT wrote:
> At 10:17 AM 02/12/15 -0800, Per I. Mathisen via RT wrote:
> >
> >On Sat, 14 Dec 2002, Davide Pagnin via RT wrote:
> >> This is actual code of city.h city_corruption(), I want to open a
> >> discussion on this whole topic and perhaps reach some agreement on what
> >> need changes.
> >
> >I agree with Raahul that this should preferably come after his waste
> >patch.
> 
> Sounds like a very good idea. There are lots of things to debate about
> the current corruption scheme. I don't think this has anything to do
> with whether waste is added using one scheme or another and it is really
> not quite fair to put all the past sins of corruption as riders on this
> task.

I agree that adding waste or not, isn't related to this.

But as I pointed out:

1) waste copy the corruption scheme, that is flawed

2) waste need mandatory capability

3) corruption scheme modification will need mandatory capability
(function included in common/ are used both by client and server, and if
you use CMA, in you client, you can't disagree with server, on how you
calculate corruption nor waste)

4) when finished, waste patch can easily be maintained up-to-date for
HEAD inclusion

> 
> I really like Renier's idea about having two interfaces to the same 
> underlying core computations, and the extension to making duplicate
> parameters everywhere is probably not resistable once you have this
> foot in the door. 

Ross may you point me to Reinier's idea? I don't find that in my mails,
thus I assume I lost something.

> 
> But that leaves the core block nicely isolated for a later round of
> discussion and patch.
> 
> [...]
> >  - Per
> 
> Cheers,
> RossW
> =====