Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: January 2004:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#7230) patrolling tririemes may sink
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#7230) patrolling tririemes may sink

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: jshort@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#7230) patrolling tririemes may sink
From: "Gregory Berkolaiko" <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 11:25:49 -0800
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxx

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=7230 >

On Mon, 26 Jan 2004, Jason Short wrote:

> 
> <URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=7230 >
> 
> > [Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxxx - Mon Jan 26 19:15:50 2004]:
> 
> > > Perhaps this solution isn't as simple as it seems.  Since it's
> > > distinctly less than optimal, it should only be used for units that
> > have
> > > danger positions.  But how are we to know which units those are?
> > 
> > add a function
> > 
> > bool pf_is_danger_defined(struct pf_parameter *param)
> > {
> >   return (param->is_pos_dangerous != NULL);
> > }
> > 
> > to the PF.  Call it after the parameters are filled in the patrol
> > route
> > creating code.
> 
> Is that better than just checking the param->is_pos_dangerous value when
> we set it?

Sorry, of course you can just check it, there is no encapsulation issue.
Raimar is right.

G.





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