[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#7344) Expanded Orders

["Arnstein Lindgard" <a-l@xxxxxxx>]

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=7344 >

On Mon, 2 Feb 2004 04:09:17 -0800 Raimar Falke wrote:

> >   hover_mission = ORDER_NONE
> >     just like
> >   hover_state = HOVER_NONE
> > 
> > instead of ORDER_LAST.
> 
> I don't understand the hover_state comment. However I know from
> TECH_NONE that I really don't like another *_NONE. So can you explain
> in more detail the "default in savegame". It sounds like a placeholder
> for a slot. But why do you need the slot in the first place?

Ok, it won't be in the savegame when the list is sent back. In the
Mission Order client, there is a slot that holds the order to be
executed on the destination. I can just as easily use ORDER_LAST.

> > > > +/* For client to determine which sprite to display. */
> > > > +enum movement_type {
> > > > +  GOTO_ORDERS, PATROL_ORDERS, STATIONARY_ORDERS
> > > > +};
> > > 
> > > The values should get a prefix.
> > 
> > I'll put ORDERS first then?

> Also if we get the "send orders back to the client" patch
> the scope of this enum is tilespec.c?!

Sprites is the full scope yes.

> Singular.

If you want singular, you must mean that the orders list is to be
expanded, so every order has a movement type. I'm for that. Since
Orders now will be the way to do things, we also should utilize it
fully and so create an interface to program workers (settlers).

If a worker is to:
  1) build road at tile A
  2) build mine at tile A
  3) move to tile B
  4) build road at tile B

I think the "G" sprite should only be displayed during step 3).
We may want to draw a new "stationary order" sprite.

For patrol, all steps would be "patrol order", but we could also
expand things so that a patroller goes Sentried when it encounters
something suspicious. (So player gets wakeup-auto-focus for the
situation if the suspicious unit runs away; maybe you want to hunt
it).


Arnstein