Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: February 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#2370) Path finding

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#2370) Path finding

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: "Per I. Mathisen" <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Raimar Falke <rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#2370) Path finding
From: Gregory Berkolaiko <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 13:28:53 +0000 (GMT)

On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Per I. Mathisen wrote:

> On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
> > > You change pf code. I am not going to touch that. Either it is possible to
> > > implement overlapping without changing pf code, or I'm sending the ball
> > > back to the two of you.
> >
> > Now, now.It was never going to be easy.  You will always have to write
> > callbacks if you want something not completely boringly standard.
> Actually, overlapping is the default now (with warmap), and I think that
> is a very wise design decision. Can we go back to doing overlapping as
> default? In most cases, we'll have to do target viability checks anyway,
> so it won't introduce an extra check.

In pf20 the default is what _you_ make it.  You are now responsible for 
supplying move_cost call-backs, through, pf_tools and writing your own 
wrappers for that.


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