Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: February 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#3524) another look at the goto_dest problem

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#3524) another look at the goto_dest problem

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#3524) another look at the goto_dest problem
From: "Jason Short" <jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 02:43:19 -0800
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Per I. Mathisen wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Feb 2003, Jason Short wrote:
>>This patch aims to just fix the initialization problem.
> It is very ugly, but I suppose you already know that. If this is necessary
> as an intermediate fix until we can do it properly, I'm for it, though.

Well, I think it is less ugly than the current situation, but I agree 
that's not saying much :-).  It is certainly a lot less ugly than the 
workarounds I've been writing for a "minimal" gen-topologies patch.

There are other questions to be answered first, though:

1. What should the goto_dest struct look like?  Earlier most people 
agreed on using a pointer, but this patch doesn't do that (and 
unnecessarily changes the goto_dest structure anyway).

2. Is it actually worthwhile to use all 5 macros (I like set, clear, and 
is_set, but goto_dest_[xy] might be a bit much).

I don't have a strong opinion on either.

> I want to get pf in before proceeding on my own patch/approach, since this
> way we can fix some of the hard underlying issues, such as client air
> goto, connect and patrol, which now is handled by the server AI.

The underlying issues certainly look very hard :-(.


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