[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #4940] Rewrite universal_fulfills_requirement()

2014-07-15 Thread Emmet Hikory
Update of patch #4940 (project freeciv): Status: Ready For Test = Done Open/Closed:Open = Closed ___ Reply to this item at:

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #4940] Rewrite universal_fulfills_requirement()

2014-07-13 Thread Emmet Hikory
Update of patch #4940 (project freeciv): Status: In Progress = Ready For Test ___ Follow-up Comment #5: Thanks a lot for reminding me about performance: figuring out how to do this with the lowest

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #4940] Rewrite universal_fulfills_requirement()

2014-07-12 Thread Emmet Hikory
URL: http://gna.org/patch/?4940 Summary: Rewrite universal_fulfills_requirement() Project: Freeciv Submitted by: persia Submitted on: Sun 13 Jul 2014 07:39:18 AM JST Category: general Priority: 5 - Normal

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #4940] Rewrite universal_fulfills_requirement()

2014-07-12 Thread Marko Lindqvist
Follow-up Comment #1, patch #4940 (project freeciv): so the callers may use a locally-scoped universal, rather than a malloc()'d universals_u, What prevented thay previously? From the patch it seems that the function did not made any assumptions if the pointer received was dynamically

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #4940] Rewrite universal_fulfills_requirement()

2014-07-12 Thread Emmet Hikory
Update of patch #4940 (project freeciv): Status: Ready For Test = In Progress ___ Follow-up Comment #2: I'm not sure anything prevented using a locally scoped variable before, but whenever I tried to

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #4940] Rewrite universal_fulfills_requirement()

2014-07-12 Thread Marko Lindqvist
Follow-up Comment #3, patch #4940 (project freeciv): I'm not sure anything prevented using a locally scoped variable before, But making the change to your existing patch to use pointers instead of value should now be trivial. Just take the pointer instead of value in, and change callers to

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #4940] Rewrite universal_fulfills_requirement()

2014-07-12 Thread Emmet Hikory
Follow-up Comment #4, patch #4940 (project freeciv): Yes, but the switch statement is unfortunate, and probably causes more of a slowdown than whether we pass a pointer or a struct containing an enum and a pointer. My thought is to replace all the callers with macros that call a common