Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: June 2004:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#8906) save shuffled_players
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#8906) save shuffled_players

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#8906) save shuffled_players
From: "Gregory Berkolaiko" <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 10:18:56 -0700
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxx

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=8906 >

On Sun, 6 Jun 2004, Jason Short wrote:

>
> <URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=8906 >
>
> Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
>
> >>>Anyway, your patch is a step in right direction.  Is set_shuffled_players
> >>>used more than once? I think you should kill it.  Set the players as you
> >>>load them.
> >>
> >>This is possible but it means the shuffled players variables must be
> >>made global (currently they are static).  I preferred to just add a new
> >>function to the interface.  But I can do it the other way if you like.
> >>Is it worth it?
> >
> > Ah, I see.  No, definitely not worth it.  Although you could make a
> > smaller function set_shuffled_player to set just one player and call it in
> > the loop, I think this is worth it.  And definitely write in the header of
> > the function that it is essentially an accessor to the static variables.
>
> This is possible (patch attached).  Only problem with this is with
> shuffled_nplayers.  This is set when the players are shuffled so that if
> the number of players change they'll be reshuffled (although I suspect
> this is impossible).  In theory it's like a boolean "is_shuffled" value.
>
> And if we set values one at a time we could end up with only some
> positions shuffled, while shuffled_nplayers has been set (since of
> course we have to set it on _every_ call to set_shuffled_player).

Ok, you choose the patch.  They are both almost equally bad ;)




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