This is the mail archive of the xconq7@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the Xconq project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Meaningful parameters.


>I'm pretty uniformly changing *unit to *actor, m to material, n to
>amount.  After that, things are a bit less uniform.  It's wordier (more
>wordy?), but I think it reads a little better.  Of course, it means
>backtracking and changing things I've already documented, and changing a
>fair amount of code, but it's probably worth the effort.

Naming units after what they actually do (*actor, *attacker etc) makes
sense when we have more than one unit, which is true in many of the action
functions. The same applies to sides.

I don't think it is a good idea to use "material" instead of "m", though.
If anything, it should be "mtype" to avoid confusion (see below). The four
basic types are consistently abbreviated as "u", "t", "m" and "a"
everywhere, not only in the code but also in the GDL. If we change "m" we
should also change "u" to "utype" everywhere, which would be a huge amount
of work (note that using "unit" instead would really confuse things).

I don't think it is too much to ask of xconq hackers that they learn what
"u", "m", "t" and "a" stand for. Some abbreviations do make life simpler.

Hans

Hans Ronne

hronne@pp.sbbs.se



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]