[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#4594) topology fix for goto route packet

["Mike Kaufman" <kaufman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 09:55:46AM -0700, rwetmore@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> Note, there is only one topology that requires you to deal with (-1,-1)
> as a real coordinate. That is an infinite plane, i.e. one in which all
> coordinate values are unique and defined. In this case, removing one or
> more of the coordinate locations for special purposes means those
> locations are not available within the space. This is the standard
> tradeoff against having to define a non-coordinate test. The debate
> here currently stands that it is more convenient to define special
> values within the coordinate space and lose such locations.
> 
> In all other topologies, there is *never* a requirement to use (-1,-1)
> as a real coordinate. It is *always* possible to represent the location
> as another coordinate value.
> 
> Freeciv is unlikely to ever handle the infinite plane case, as there are
> too many bounds limitations to be resolved first :-). So there is and will
> never be a need in Freeciv to deal with (-1,-1) as a real coordinate. Thus
> any further considerations of such a definition or requirement should be
> dropped as completely counterproductive.

huh Ross? A bicylinder topology should get you (-1,-1) quite easily. Am I
wrong? In an 80x50 map, isn't (80,50) == (-1,-1)? If a unit is at (0,0) and
moves "northwest", is it not on (-1,-1) before normalization?

Frankly this whole discussion seems to be in bizarro world. It's plain as
day that (-1,-1) is a perfectly legitimate coordinate unless the server
defines it specially in which case the client better the hell know about
it. But if that's the case, we require the client normalize any special
coordinates: seems onerous.

Explain again why an extra bit sent is not the wisest course of action?

-mike