Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: June 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#4387) The Return of the Rand() Moves
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#4387) The Return of the Rand() Moves

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: per@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#4387) The Return of the Rand() Moves
From: "Raimar Falke" <rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 13:24:30 -0700
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 09:37:32AM -0700, Per I. Mathisen wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, Raimar Falke wrote:
> > > Unfortunately, I really don't see a way of computing the real average time
> > > in PF.
> >
> > To clarify this: it is easy to calculate the weighted cost of a single
> > step if you have a "concrete" state (turn and moves left are
> > integers). However after the first step such you don't have this. You
> > have something like (turn=0,moves_left=1.47). So it is hard/imopssible
> > to calculate the weighted cost of the next step.
> 
> I've gone back and reread the debate about rand() movement. I think it is
> time to remove rand() moves. Clearly pf does not handle it as effortlessly
> as it was advertised back then and which was part of the reason why the
> debate died off.

No if the only reason is that it is hard to implement. The current PF
works very good with the current move model. Chris has a point that it
can be made better but this is just the top notch which is missing
here. And I think the outlines implementation (which is optimal in all
cases except maybe danger) isn't this hard.

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 "The Internet is really just a series of bottlenecks 
  joined by high speed networks."
    -- Sam Wilson




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