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: Raimar Falke <rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Freeciv Development List <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#2370) Path finding
From: Gregory Berkolaiko <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 23:19:13 +0000

Quoting Raimar Falke <rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

> On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 10:58:51PM +0000, Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
> > Quoting Raimar Falke <rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > 
> > > > Give me a problem that requires "known" here and cannot be solved by
> > > existing
> > > > call-backs and then we can negotiate.
> > > 
> > > This one extra argument is one extra push for the caller. Thats it. No
> > > other cost. gcc doesn't pop but just adjusts the %esp directly. And it
> > > has no influence on the called function (if the function doesn't use
> > > it). I expect that a push is fast. Very fast since you need it
> > > everytime you call a function.
> > 
> > Don't push it on me, man!  Since you are not giving me the example
> > that needs it, we will assume that none such exists.
> That callback were your idea. I have no code which needs this callback
> at all.
> But your point (add it if current code needs it) is mood. This way we
> wouldn't have EC, is_pos_dangerous and TM_*_TIME.

Not true.  I am not asking for existing code / problem.  I am asking for any
(future) situation where we would need this.  And I can give you situations (as
you can do yourself) where there is need for EC, is_pos_dangerous and TM_*_TIME.


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