[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [FreeCiv-Cvs] per: Preparation patch for player authentication. In...

[Raimar Falke <rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 08:28:47AM -0500, Mike Kaufman wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 11:50:50AM +0200, Raimar Falke wrote:
> > 
> > > > take kaufman Foo
> > 
> > If I use this command from the client "take" (one argument) is ok. But
> > at the server (two arguments) it should be "assign" or similar.
> 
> I don't think it's necessary to pollute the command set with a command that
> takes an additional argument but does exactly the same thing.
> 
> > > removing noname [0]
> > 
> > Where does this "[0]" comes from.
> 
> 'noname' is generic, which means if more than one user connects, you'll get
> more than one noname. [0] refers to game.players[0] or the player in slot
> 0. It was mainly for debugging purposes, but it can be useful otherwise. If
> you really hate it, it can be removed.

I guessed where it comes from. The problem is that you don't show this
number in the output of "list".

> > This situation is similar to the start (after you connected). In both
> > cases no player was assigned to the human player. But the outputs
> > differ. At the start kaufman was listed here.
> 
> actually the situation is completely different. If you start the game right
> now, Bob will start a [one-player] ai game all by himself. The user kaufman
> will just sit in the staging area: he's not attached to a player.

I have a small problem with "noname" here:

===========================
> li
List of players:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
noname (username kaufman, Human) 1 connection:   
  kaufman from localhost.localdomain (command access level ctrl),
bufsize=40kb
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
===========================

It is more a "unset name", "unassigned name" or a "no name yet".

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 "On the eigth day, God started debugging"