From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11657 invoked by alias); 17 Aug 2004 18:59:15 -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 11650 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2004 18:59:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO av15-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net) (81.228.10.101) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 17 Aug 2004 18:59:14 -0000 Received: by av15-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id DD34837E46; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:59:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp4-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp4-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.181]) by av15-2-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC58B37E42 for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:59:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [212.181.162.155] (h155n1fls24o1048.bredband.comhem.se [212.181.162.155]) by smtp4-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6550937E4A for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:59:13 +0200 (CEST) X-Sender: u22611592@m1.226.comhem.se Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:29:00 -0000 To: xconq7@sources.redhat.com From: Hans Ronne Subject: Major bug - progress report X-SW-Source: 2004/txt/msg00932.txt.bz2 >1. Getting rid of unit pointers in the task code. I have looked into the >possibility of feeding unit views instead of units to the attack and >fire-at actions, as suggested by Stan, and I think it can be done. Most of >the problems are related to interface callbacks that ask for real units, >but I think they can be fixed with a reasonable amount of work. This was a rather optimistic statement. In fact, the unit pointers go all the way up to the interface code (via advance_into_cell). I'm purging the tcltk interface of them right now, and had to add a bunch of x_unit_view_ functions in the process. I haven't even started with the other interfaces. There are also cases where action code that already is dealing with real units calls do_fire_at_action. Not sure what to do about that yet. Perhaps clone the function. So this may take a while, and will probably affect every kernel and interface file in the end. But I think it had to be done. And it is only now, when we have the improved, more unit-like unit views that it could have been done. Hans