[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Update of patch #1446 (project freeciv): Planned Release: 2.4.0 => ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Message sen

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Update of patch #1446 (project freeciv): Planned Release: 2.3.0 => 2.4.0 ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Message po

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Update of patch #1446 (project freeciv): Depends on: => patch #1735 ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Nachricht

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Update of patch #1446 (project freeciv): Depends on: => patch #1338 ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Nachricht

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #18, patch #1446 (project freeciv): I updated all all enum * patches; it seems to work but could somebody please check them; thanks! [bug #1678] 01-trunk-add-SPECENUM_NUM [bug #1646] 02-trunk-use-specenum_gen-for-enum-effect_type [bug #1648] 03-trunk-use-specenum_gen-for-enum-r

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Update of patch #1446 (project freeciv): Depends on: => patch #1678 ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Nachricht

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Update of patch #1446 (project freeciv): Depends on: => patch #1662 ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Nachricht

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Update of patch #1446 (project freeciv): Depends on: => patch #1658 ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Nachricht

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #17, patch #1446 (project freeciv): > I am not sure, but maybe patch #1646 should use the names that are used in the ruleset file, maybe defining SPECENUM_VALUEx_NAMEs? This is a good idea. It would move the definitions (enum and strings) to one place. working version of file

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #16, patch #1446 (project freeciv): I am not sure, but maybe patch #1646 should use the names that are used in the ruleset file, maybe defining SPECENUM_VALUEx_NAMEs? ___ Reply to this item at:

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #15, patch #1446 (project freeciv): I tried to do it in one big step ... but this failed. The attached file includes my idea for the advances. I tried to do no changes to the main codebase (thus the file temp.(c|h)). The patch includes patch #1646 to patch #1652. My new approac

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Update of patch #1446 (project freeciv): Depends on: => patch #1651 ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Nachricht

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Update of patch #1446 (project freeciv): Depends on: => patch #1646 ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Nachricht

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #14, patch #1446 (project freeciv): file #9018 is just a test patch, it's not for commit, it is not good at all... And yes, I made patch #1642 from a part of this test patch... ___ Reply to this item at:

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #13, patch #1446 (project freeciv): > I did it, results without compression are : I tried to test this using patch file #9018 but it seems to be missing some parts and contains most of patch #1642 ___ Reply to this item

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #12, patch #1446 (project freeciv): > Can you make in your side a estimation of the size of the packet you request? I will try to setup the ruleset object and the corresponding secfile. > Removing the nation file: I think, that the nations should be separated from the rule

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #11, patch #1446 (project freeciv): [1] I changed my mind, this looks an excellent idea after some checking. ___ Reply to this item at: ___ M

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #10, patch #1446 (project freeciv): > Can you make in your side a estimation of the size of the packet > you request? I did it, results without compression are : 2: Ruleset file techs: 11818 bytes, 11818 in total 2: Ruleset file buildings: 33567 bytes, 45385 in total 2: Rulese

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #9, patch #1446 (project freeciv): New test for PACKET_RULESET_NATION stats (still default ruleset in trunk at revision 17383): those packets represents 79570 bytes, so more than the half of the whole stuff (only 56709 byes for the rest of the ruleset)... It's quite a waste bec

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #8, patch #1446 (project freeciv): Is this much traffic? On-line games impossible? I do not have any data to compare. That is the size of the all packages currently needed to transfer the ruleset? For information: I got the result of 136279 bytes received for the default rulese

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #7, patch #1446 (project freeciv): > [1] Do we need the client parse the ruleset file? I guess it would make a very big network traffic when someone will connect. It would probably make on-line games impossible, what do you think? I don't know ... If I consider the default rul

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #6, patch #1446 (project freeciv): [1] Do we need the client parse the ruleset file? I guess it would make a very big network traffic when someone will connect. It would probably make on-line games impossible, what do you think?

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #5, patch #1446 (project freeciv): Another idea: use a ruleset file (see point 4 of comment 1) as 'packet' to transport all information to the client. This could be done as follows: * read the current rulesetdir into a ruleset object * verify the ruleset * transform it to a se

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #4, patch #1446 (project freeciv): > 1 & 2) I have already thought about a such solution for numerous structures of Freeciv. However, this is quite problematic. Most ruleset types for example need a translation support that need a gettext() pointer, which cannot be used in a pac

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #3, patch #1446 (project freeciv): 3) I agree. 4) I had similar idea. This would also give a way to save a ruleset into a savegame, and probably also to make a ruleset editor in a very far future... ___ Reply to this it

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #2, patch #1446 (project freeciv): 1 & 2) I have already thought about a such solution for numerous structures of Freeciv. However, this is quite problematic. Most ruleset types for example need a translation support that need a gettext() pointer, which cannot be used in a packe

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Follow-up Comment #1, patch #1446 (project freeciv): some ideas about the ruleset rework: 1) at the moment all ruleset data used in the ruleset files is saved in the packet_ruleset_* structs; so use them for a ruleset object: struct ruleset { struct packet_ruleset_game game; ... /* spec

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Update of patch #1446 (project freeciv): Depends on: => bugs #13873 ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Message po

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Update of patch #1446 (project freeciv): Depends on: => patch #1447 ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Message po

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

Update of patch #1446 (project freeciv): Category: general => rulesets ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Message po

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1446] [Metaticket] Ruleset object

URL: Summary: [Metaticket] Ruleset object Project: Freeciv Submitted by: pepeto Submitted on: samedi 06.02.2010 à 13:22 Category: general Priority: 1 - Later