Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: August 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#4620) Re: Re: (PR#5106) assertion in get_defender 		Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#4620) Re: Re: (PR#5106) assertion in get_defender

[Top] [All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: kaufman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ChrisK@xxxxxxxx, kenn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#4620) Re: Re: (PR#5106) assertion in get_defender
From: "Per I. Mathisen" <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 09:25:48 -0700
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, Jason Short wrote:
> Calling can_unit_attack_unit_at_tile is not enough.In fact, it's
> already done. We need to call can_player_attack_tile.
...
> I'm not sure about your proposed long-term solution. Do all
> get_defender users correctly check can_player_attack_tile?

No. See eg bool handle_unit_move_request(). This function should be able
to receive illegal requests from the client without dumping core.

   - Per
[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]
  • [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#4620) Re: Re: (PR#5106) assertion in get_defender, Per I. Mathisen <=