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: Consumption-per-fire?


>P.S. As a final note, some of the problems with consumption-per-fire are
>due to the fact that you can use the fire-into action to fire at invisible
>units. To avoid leaking info about unseen units back to the attacker,
>check_fire_into_action therefore calls enough_ammo_to_fire_one_round which
>does some kind of general check for ability to fire. However, I'm not sure
>that this code, which bypasses the use of the hit-by table, works as
>expected in all cases.

As a followup, the reason why I don't like this code is that
do_fire_into_action iterates over the stack and than uses a real test for
each unit (enough_ammo_to_fire_at_unit) instead of the bogus test
(enough_ammo_to_fire_one_round). It's not a good idea to have the
check_action and do_action code use different tests.

Hans



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