Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: July 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#4345) pcity->occupied not properly updated
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#4345) pcity->occupied not properly updated

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#4345) pcity->occupied not properly updated
From: "Gregory Berkolaiko" <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 15:02:50 -0700
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Wed, 16 Jul 2003, Jason Short wrote:

> Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Jul 2003, Jason Short wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>Here are updates of both variants, which I have called A and B.  Again, 
> >>A is simple but leads to spurious packets being sent every time units 
> >>move into/out of a city.  B is slightly more complicated and only sends 
> >>update packets when needed.
> > 
> > 
> > B is for Better.
> > 
> > Why having a traderoute to a city qualifies you to have the updated 
> > "occupied" info on the city?
> 
> Basically by chance.  If you have a traderoute to a city you get 
> short_city_packets updating you about that city.  This information just 
> happens to include the occupied status.

Ok, then why having a traderoute to a city qualifies you to receive any 
info contained in the dumb_city struct?  It doesn't contain anything 
about trade, does it?  

G.




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