public inbox for xconq7@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric McDonald <mcdonald@phy.cmich.edu>
To: Lincoln Peters <sampln@sbcglobal.net>
Cc: Xconq list <xconq7@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Reduced Visibility Table?
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 21:13:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312022154040.3913-100000@leon.phy.cmich.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1070419340.15132.353.camel@odysseus>

Hi Lincoln,

On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Lincoln Peters wrote:

> Could there have been more than one unit in that cell?  

I checked for that by thoroughly scouring the hex and its vicinity 
with land units and air units following the obliteration of the 
enemy Armor. So I think the chances are low, though not 
impossible. Anyway, it would still be a bug because any other unit 
that could have possibly been in that cell would also have been 
vulnerable to the Fighters and hence should have been attacked....

>I've run into
> that occasionally, but only when two or more enemy units are present in
> a cell and I am only aware of the presence of one of them.

Yes, I have too. It can make firing into a cell a total PITA.

>  It's because
> when the UI tries to figure out what you want to do, it sees multiple
> small unit images when you see only one, 

Right. I believe that the xform_unit code in kernel/ui.c is 
partially responsible for this, or at least that's what I got from
looking at it when I was fixing a bug last week.

> I would agree that it's a bug; the action the unit takes should be based
> on what you see when you click on a cell, not necessarily what is
> actually there.
> 
> Did anything I just said make any sense?

Completely. Like I said, I have seen this behavior too. But I 
believe it to be a separate issue.

Eric

  reply	other threads:[~2003-12-03  3:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-12-01 22:35 Elijah Meeks
2003-12-01 23:18 ` Hans Ronne
2003-12-02  1:09   ` Elijah Meeks
2003-12-02  4:02     ` Hans Ronne
2003-12-01 23:23 ` Bruno Boettcher
2003-12-01 23:27   ` Lincoln Peters
2003-12-01 23:43     ` Stan Shebs
2003-12-02  0:30       ` Hans Ronne
2003-12-02  0:54         ` Lincoln Peters
2003-12-02  0:58           ` Hans Ronne
2003-12-02  4:46       ` Eric McDonald
2003-12-02  4:04     ` Eric McDonald
2003-12-02  4:16       ` Eric McDonald
2003-12-02 20:56       ` Hans Ronne
2003-12-03  2:41         ` Eric McDonald
2003-12-03  3:04           ` Lincoln Peters
2003-12-03 21:13             ` Eric McDonald [this message]
2003-12-01 23:32   ` Hans Ronne
2003-12-02 15:04     ` Bruno Boettcher
2003-12-02 19:57       ` Emmanuel Fritsch
2003-12-03  2:12         ` Hans Ronne
2003-12-03  2:22       ` Eric McDonald

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.44.0312022154040.3913-100000@leon.phy.cmich.edu \
    --to=mcdonald@phy.cmich.edu \
    --cc=sampln@sbcglobal.net \
    --cc=xconq7@sources.redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).