Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: April 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#3745) Diplomacy patch part 3
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#3745) Diplomacy patch part 3

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: per@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#3745) Diplomacy patch part 3
From: "Gregory Berkolaiko" <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 04:20:29 -0700
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Quoting "Per I. Mathisen" <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>:

> 
> On Sat, 19 Apr 2003, Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
> > > This patch backports one new function from the AI diplomacy patch,
> ...
> > I am not sure why you need this for diplomacy patches (as opposed to AI
> diplomacy)?
> 
> I don't. I want to update the AI diplomacy patch, and I'd like this to go
> in separately first. Makes the former smaller, which is always a good
> thing.

Ok.

> > Nitpicks:
> >
> > I would rename struct ai_diplomacy to struct ai_dip_intel and other
> > to player_intel.
> >
> > I would do just
> > +return (pplayers_at_war(pplayer, aplayer)
> > +    || pplayer->diplstates[aplayer->player_no].has_reason_to_cancel
> > +    || ai->diplomacy.acceptable_reputation > aplayer->reputation
> > +    || adip->is_allied_with_enemy);
> > as opposed to if.
> 
> Sure. Want me to make a new version (may take some days), or can you do
> the changes & commit?

I am making a new version.  I took a liberty of changing player_is_dangerous to
is_player_dangerous (this seems to be more standard is_ indicates bool return
value).  I hope that doesn't break your other patches too much.

G.





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