[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#3936) introducing native coordinates

[Jason Dorje Short <vze49r5w@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Raimar Falke wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 09:00:59AM -0400, Ross Wetmore wrote:
> > Raimar Falke wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 05:50:43PM -0500, Jason Dorje Short wrote:
> > > > Raimar Falke wrote:
> > > > > - which iso variants do we support (IMHO both)
> > > > Hmm?  The "variants" you talk about in the file are just a different 
> > > > numbering system; there's nothing fundamentally different between them.
> > Raimar is starting from scratch with his version and may take some time
> > until he comes up to speed on what is relevant and what is not.
> >
> > Meanwhile we should try to avoid too much wheel reinvention and try to
> > keep the discussion on reviewing things relevant to the proposed patch,
> > rather than always getting sidetracked too far into dead ends.
>
> I have abandoned the idea to write my own implementation since it
> would similar to Jason gen_topo patch. However this patch has some
> problems:
>  - missing reasons for certain decisions
>  - missing documentation (I wrote this now)
>  - some slightly wrong code (native_to_map_pos doesn't return y=0)
>  - code (unnormalize_map_pos) that hard to understand. I would say too
>  hard.
>
> If these are addressed I'm for appling this patch.
There are also other known bugs in the patch.

> > > > > - in which form is wrapping defined? Do we support multiple wrapping
> > > > > forms (iso view form and non-iso view form)?
> > > > I don't know what this means.  Wrapping is defined for both iso and 
> > > > non-iso maps, and is identical in both when done in "native coordinates".
> > > Ok so the wrapping operations are defnied in the compact
> > > form. Question: is wrapping defined in compact form the same as
> > > wrapping defined in iso-view form? IMHO yes but I'm not sure.
> > The wrapping concept is the same no matter which coordinate you choose
> > to use for the implementation. Some coordinate systems are more
> > efficient at doing this, i.e. aligned with the wrap axes.
>
> This is about
> http://www.freeciv.org/~rfalke/grid_pictures/grid_iso_rot_wrap.png vs
> http://www.freeciv.org/~rfalke/grid_pictures/grid_iso_wrap.png vs a
> similar picture for
> http://www.freeciv.org/~rfalke/grid_pictures/grid_compact.png.
The former isn't an isometric map at all; it's a non-iso map (or some 
sort of hybrid) with a different normal set.  So it is very different 
from the other two.
jason