14-03-2005 20:25									#91
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

For those investigating the changes calvitix made, I attach diffs for each of calvitix's submitted alterations (at least, that's what they should be, assuming the version control worked out properly ). There is one file here for each complete submission, in the relatively readable diff format.

Attachment: calvitix_alterations.rar
This has been downloaded 5 time(s).

	14-03-2005 21:28									#92
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

John is there an option for the diff creation of ignoring white space changes? Unfortunatly the code files of the first 3 diffs submissions contain heavey white space changes, that makes difficuilt to find the real changes.

-Martin

	15-03-2005 00:23									#93
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Well, I can do it like the one I attach here, which should ignore changes to the whitespace on any given line, but it can't ignore whole additions or removals of blank lines, because that would change the line numbering. Also, this isn't in such a readable format.

Attachment: caltivix_alterations2.rar
This has been downloaded 2 time(s).

	15-03-2005 02:58									#94
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Martin Gühmann What about this: [...] By the way I didn't understand for what this nb_transport variable is and why Calvitix checks whether m_transport > 0 and transport_nb > 0, the first check should be included in the second one.

I think it is anti-symmetrical now. And also difficult to understand. From what I understand of it, the m_transport value is the number of free transport slots, and the extra guard (both values > 0) is used to prevent using this condition when comparing a transport army against a non-transport army. But I think that mixing 4 different concepts (remaining transport capacity, battle strength, shield cost, #of agents) in a single operator does not work well. It is probably better to define a specific operator for each concept.

	15-03-2005 04:52									#95
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Fromafar And also difficult to understand.

That's why I wanted to hear another opinion.

quote: Originally posted by Fromafar From what I understand of it, the m_transport value is the number of free transport slots, and the extra guard (both values > 0) is used to prevent using this condition when comparing a transport army against a non-transport army.

OK, then it isn't needed in the current version. As it leaves the function if the transport capacity is unequal.

quote: Originally posted by Fromafar But I think that mixing 4 different concepts (remaining transport capacity, battle strength, shield cost, #of agents) in a single operator does not work well. It is probably better to define a specific operator for each concept.

Well the concepts are at least in a hirachy. First the transport capacity and if it is euql in both stacks then the strength is compared and if the strength of both stacks is zero then the sizes are compared.

J just don't see the shield cost part, maybe the m_value but for that I have to take a closer look. And if it is this then we should reconsider it.

- Martin