[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#8754) effects patch

["Per Inge Mathisen" <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=8754 >

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Jason Dorje Short wrote:
> > The ***_direct() functions are way too cryptically named.
>
> Or to put it another way, what's the difference between
> can_player_build_improvement_direct ("Whether player can build given
> improvement somewhere, ignoring whether improvement is obsolete.") and
> can_player_eventually_build_improvement ("Whether player can
> _eventually_ build given improvement somewhere -- ie, returns 1 if
> improvement is available with current tech OR will be available with
> future tech.returns 0 if unit is obsolete.")?
>
> What's the difference between can_player_eventually_build_improvement
> and could_player_eventually_build_improvement?
>
> Similarly, what's the difference between
> can_eventually_build_improvement and can_build_improvement_direction?
>
> Obviously these are logically different (except for the "can" versus
> "could" difference which seems purelysemantic).But why does the user
> need both?And how is he supposed to tell which is which?

This is in the code now, and is not a problem created by the effects
patch. So it is odd of you to chastise Vasco for adding unrelated changes
to the patch, and then encourage him to add more of the same ;)

The subtle differences between the functions can probably be explained by
AI needs.

  - Per