Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: May 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [FreeCiv-Cvs] glip: Remove an overzealous assert from
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [FreeCiv-Cvs] glip: Remove an overzealous assert from

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: [FreeCiv-Cvs] glip: Remove an overzealous assert from dir_get_name...
From: Raimar Falke <rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 19:10:57 +0200

On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 04:50:45PM -0500, Jason Dorje Short wrote:
> freeciv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >This is an automated notification of a change to freeciv cvs, 
> >on Wed Apr 30 13:29:16 PDT 2003 = Wed Apr 30 20:29:16 2003 (GMT)
> >by Gregory Berkolaiko <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >---- Files affected:
> >
> >freeciv/common map.c
> >
> >---- Log message:
> >      Tag: HEAD
> >
> >Remove an overzealous assert from dir_get_name so that pf_print_path can 
> >do its job without problems.
> 
> Why is this an overzealous assert?  Isn't it a bug in pf_print_path?  Is 
> there a PR# for this?  Did I miss something?

Per and Greg think that a lot of asserts are overzealous ;) Especially
when they trigger.

Every path has at one position (the last one) which doesn't have a
valid direction for the next. Yes we can special case this in
pf_print_path. But this also isn't _this_ nice.

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 "Premature optimization is the root of all evil."
    -- D. E. Knuth in "Structured Programming with go to Statements"



[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]
  • [Freeciv-Dev] Re: [FreeCiv-Cvs] glip: Remove an overzealous assert from dir_get_name..., Raimar Falke <=