From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19801 invoked by alias); 15 Sep 2004 03:06:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact xconq7-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: xconq7-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 19789 invoked from network); 15 Sep 2004 03:05:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO sccrmhc13.comcast.net) (204.127.202.64) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 15 Sep 2004 03:05:59 -0000 Received: from [192.168.181.128] (c-67-172-156-222.client.comcast.net[67.172.156.222]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc13) with ESMTP id <20040915030558016005vq6be>; Wed, 15 Sep 2004 03:05:58 +0000 Message-ID: <4147B18D.1080106@phy.cmich.edu> Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 03:18:00 -0000 From: Eric McDonald User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Windows/20040626) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lincoln Peters CC: Xconq list Subject: Re: Bug in side_controls_unit References: <1095204082.15989.7.camel@localhost> In-Reply-To: <1095204082.15989.7.camel@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004/txt/msg01168.txt.bz2 Lincoln Peters wrote: > Attached to the bottom of this message is necromancer.g, the game module > I wrote to test the unit control code. While testing it, I have > experienced crashes which I have traced back to the side_controls_unit > function, and I have experienced non-fatal logic errors in which units > become uncontrolled after moving, even if they're still well within > control-range of a unit that can control them (and that is itself > controlled). These logic errors are usually followed very soon by a > segfault. Sounds like a bug. I will look into it as soon as I finish taking care of stuff for Elijah. > (table unit-control-chance > (u* u* 0) ;; Most units are unable to control other units. > (places u* 100) ;; Places can control nearby units. > (necromancer u* 100) ;; Necromancers can control *all* of their > minions. > (vampire unintelligent-dead 100) ;; Vampires can control unintelligent > undead. > (lich dead 100) ;; The lich can control any undead. > ) > > (table unit-control-range > (u* u* 0) > (knight commoner 4) ;; Knights can (try to) aid lost villagers. Shouldn't knights have a 'control-chance' greater than 0 vs. commoners, in order for the range to mean anything? Eric