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
next prev parent 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).