Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: April 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#3936) introducing native coordinates
Home

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

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
Cc: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#3936) introducing native coordinates
From: Jason Dorje Short <vze49r5w@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 14:04:12 -0500
Reply-to: jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

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



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