http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39849 >
Jason Dorje Short wrote:
>> Naive is fine but you forgot to add the check to configure.ac. Attached
>> patch does that.
>>
I didn't forget; that ensured my new code was compiled and tested
> ... Yet it is
> clearly present in the hea
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39849 >
Jason Dorje Short wrote:
> http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39849 >
>
> William Allen Simpson wrote:
>> http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39849 >
>>
>> Naive trunk implementation:
>
> Naive is fine but you forgot
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39850 >
On Windows Vista (fully updated), latest SDL client of Freeciv, Freeciv
will dependably crash if the follow steps are taken:
1. Install Freeciv
2. Run civclient.exe
3. Select "Start New Game"
4. Hit "Start"
5. When the game starts, move a un
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39849 >
William Allen Simpson wrote:
> http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39849 >
>
> Naive trunk implementation:
Naive is fine but you forgot to add the check to configure.ac. Attached
patch does that.
But now it still won't compile
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39845 >
Egor Vyscrebentsov wrote:
> Maybe there can be other iterator than city, say border_sources_iterator.
> (where border_source is union, for example.) [I understand that this has
> its own contras.]
>
I've not been sufficiently clear. The cod
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39845 >
William Allen Simpson wrote:
> http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39845 >
>
> Randy Kramer wrote:
>> If this is a step toward making freeciv more civ3-ish, I'd like to request
>> that a means be kept to continue to have civ1 and
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39845 >
William Allen Simpson wrote:
> http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39845 >
>
> Jason Dorje Short wrote:
>> A triple-loop is also rather tedious (possibly too slow with a very
>> large number of old cities in the game). A simpler
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39849 >
Naive trunk implementation:
Index: utility/support.c
===
--- utility/support.c (revision 13930)
+++ utility/support.c (working copy)
@@ -156,6 +156,40 @@
}
/***
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39845 >
On Thu, 8 Nov 2007 William Allen Simpson wrote:
> Egor Vyscrebentsov wrote:
> > Does this mean that there will never be other source than city?
> > (I can't see place for fortresses in this algorithm.)
>
> Even in the current code, the test
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39845 >
On Friday 09 November 2007 07:44 am, William Allen Simpson wrote:
> http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39845 >
> Randy Kramer wrote:
> > If this is a step toward making freeciv more civ3-ish, I'd like to request
> > that a means
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39845 >
On 11/9/07, William Allen Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I also examined the 467+ "->owner" [and 10 tile_get_owner] references in
> 70 files. [Why, oh why, do folks not use the accessor functions?] And
> fixed them!
Not using accesso
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39845 >
Randy Kramer wrote:
> If this is a step toward making freeciv more civ3-ish, I'd like to request
> that a means be kept to continue to have civ1 and civ2 like play.
>
That's part of the idea. The current code is not parameterized.
(Per
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39845 >
Jason Dorje Short wrote:
> A triple-loop is also rather tedious (possibly too slow with a very
> large number of old cities in the game). A simpler loop is possible if
> we make border assignment context-based and impose the restraint that
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39845 >
On Friday 09 November 2007 12:47 am, Jason Dorje Short wrote:
> I have to agree with per that changing the borders system is an
> unfortunately tricky problem. Having consistent/realistic/logical/fair
> behavior in all cases may not really
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39849 >
Jason Dorje Short wrote:
> But, strcasestr is a nonstandard glibc extension. To be portable we
> need to use mystrcasestr and have a configure-time check or just
> implement it ourselves. Or avoid using it, of course.
>
Actually a standa
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39848 >
Jason Dorje Short wrote:
> If I'm not mistaken the city_owner field was removed a few days ago.
No, it is a long-time existing access function. The problem here is that
my (PR#39841) string search and replace was confused by the annoying
ca
16 matches
Mail list logo
