Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: August 2004:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#2521) effects patch

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#2521) effects patch

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: kaufman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#2521) effects patch
From: "Vasco Alexandre da Silva Costa" <vasc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 19:23:38 -0700
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxx

<URL: >

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Jason Short wrote:

> <URL: >
> Vasco Alexandre da Silva Costa wrote:
> >>>Makes no functional difference for the present ruleset. But this way the
> >>>effects data is self-descriptive (what is more readable: "SS_Module",
> >>>"1", or "Space_Part", "3"?).
> > Yeah, but that way you can only have a space part per improvement.
> > However, I don't know if that is a very bad restriction or not.
> Really?  You can't have two different effects with different "amounts"?

You can do that, but it is ill advised.

> Are these amounts or values cumulative?  Is some code going to try to
> add them together if the ruleset makes a mistake?  That could be bad.

Yes, they are cumulative. Like in Ben or Mike's effects patches. Which is
why doing this is bad. Different effects should have different effect
types, or some other way of diferentiation, e.g. in the requirements, but
not in the value. The value is not meant for this. It is only meant for
integer effect values. The values are summed per improvement effect type,
the default value being zero.

Vasco Alexandre da Silva Costa @ Instituto Superior Tecnico, Lisboa

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