Update of bug #14230 (project freeciv):

             Assigned to:                    None => cazfi                  
         Planned Release:                    None => 2.2.0                  

    _______________________________________________________

Follow-up Comment #1:

- This change may make sense, but I mention it anyway: plrhand.c:182-> you
replace "S_S_RUNNING != server_state()" with "!server_state_started()". This
changes behavior as latter accepts S_S_OVER.
- plrhand.c:678-> you replace "assert(S_S_RUNNING > server_state() ..." with
"assert(server_state_started() ..". Former accepts S_S_INITIAL &
S_S_GENERATING_WAITING, latter S_S_RUNNING and S_S_OVER
- plrhand.c:1111-> you replace "S_S_INITIAL != server_state()" with
"server_state_started()". Former accepts S_S_GENERATING_WAITING, latter does
not
- I think this one is a bugfix: savegame.c:4588-> "S_S_RUNNING ==
tmp_server_state" replaced with "tmp_server_state > S_S_GENERATING_WAITING".
Latter will catch also S_S_OVER
- sernet.c:571-> you replace "S_S_INITIAL != server_state()" with
"server_state_started()". I think this one is harmless as this code path is
never executed during S_S_GENERATING_WAITING anyway. ... Rethinking as I
write... ...not executed with *current* code base. It might if we ever run
these things in separate threads. Better to fix this just in case.
- server_state_pregame() & server_state_started() function headers: In list
of states "and" -> "or"
- server_state_started() function header "startet" -> "started"
- There's not enough context in diff to decide if this is correct or not:
srv_main.c:1698-> "NULL == pplayer || S_S_INITIAL != server_state()" replaced
with "NULL == pplayer || server_state_started()". They differ in how they
handle S_S_GENERATING_WAITING
- You declare server_state_pregame() and server_state_started() as inline
functions in srv_main.h, yet you do not provide code for them there. Just
remove inline keyword. You may define them as macros instead (that would be
consistent with rest of the codebase)
- More changes to how S_S_GENERATING_WAITING would be handled, but they all
seem ok

    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://gna.org/bugs/?14230>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via/by Gna!
  http://gna.org/


_______________________________________________
Freeciv-dev mailing list
Freeciv-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev

Reply via email to